UFO - ΑΤΙΑ (Άγνωστης Ταυτότητας Ιπτάμενο Αντικείμενο)

[dhatz]

For what it's worth, υλικό απο το αρχείο του Wilbert Smith, ο οποίος ήταν επικεφαλής του UFO Project της Καναδικής κυβέρνησης μεταξύ 1950-1954. Ο οποίος ήταν μηχανικός (MS EEng) και ειχε θέσεις στην Καναδική ΕΕΤΤ.

Υπάρχουν μερικά πράγματα στο κείμενο και στη συνέντευξη που δεν μου "κάθονται" και τόσο καλά (π.χ. πως βγαίνουν τα ποσοστά στις πιθανότητες - θα πει βεβαια κανείς οτι και στην εξίσωση Drake τα νουμερα είναι εντελως αυθαίρετα).

Ωστόσο το στέλνω κι ας το κρίνει ο καθένας μας κι ας βγάλει τα δικά του συμπεράσματα. Θυμιζω πάντως ότι μιλάμε για το 1950-1960 και το επιπεδο γνώσεων της εποχής,



Project Magnet

Magnet was the official flying saucer investigation by the Canadian government. It was headed up for the four years it was operational by Wilbert Smith. The program began after Smith wrote a Top Secret memo to the Deputy Minister of Transport for Air services C.P. Edwards, and the Assistant Minister J.R. Baldwin.

The Top Secret memo described a possible new propulsion system powered by the earth’s magnetic field. Smith felt that this was the principle being demonstrated by the flying saucers.

In a series of "discreet inquiries" in the United States Smith was able to discover five key points about flying saucers, based on what he was told about the American flying saucer program.

1) The matter of UFOs was the most highly classified subject in the US, rating higher than the H-bomb
2) Flying saucers exist
3) Their modus operandi is unknown, but concentrated effort is being made by a small group headed by Dr. Vannevar Bush, (Of 'MJ12' fame)
4) The entire matter is considered by US authorities to be of tremendous significance.
5) There were a number of other things including "mental phenomena" that were being studies because of their possible link to the saucers.

Project Magnet Interim Report

Classified 1953. Not declassified till 1979. The conclusions of the report were as follows:

Based on strict statistical analysis Smith team determined that there was a 91% probability that the objects are real, and a 60% probability that they are alien vehicles.

The report sat on the Prime Minister’s desk for three months. At the end of the period Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent determined that the time for the release of such a report was not right, and Wilbert Smith apparently went along with the decision.

1959 Smith wrote to a man who was attempting to pry the Project Magnet report loose. Smith wrote "You will recall last March that I didn’t think you had the proverbial snowball’s chance of prying it loose. No minister in his right mind is going to release ANY report which in any way might prove embarrassing or give rise to questions which he or his colleagues might find difficult to answer.

Συνεντευξη του το 1961 (πεθανε ενα χρόνο μετά το 1962, 52 ετων):
In a just recovered 1961 interview with television station CJOH, the former head of the official Canadian Government UFO investigation, Wilbert Smith, was asked a number of questions about what he had learned during his days of investigating flying saucers for the government. Among the many questions was one about whether or not communication had taken place “between space people and people of this planet,” and if communication had occurred – how was it done?

The question of communication addressed to Smith was important, not only because he headed up the official government investigation into UFOs from 1950 – 1954, but because Smith was one of the foremost communications experts of the day.

Smith worked as the chief radio engineer for the Canadian government, going on in 1956 to head up the countries radio regulations department. More importantly, he was in charge of monitoring 50,000 radio frequencies in Canada, and ran the Top Secret “Radio Ottawa” where spies would radio in to intelligence services.

Smith’s reply to the interviewer regarding the subject of talking to aliens was positive.

“Some of the communications have been on a face-to-face basis but I have not been so honored myself. Some of the communications have been by ordinary radio, and I have received a few messages by this means. But by far the majority of the communications are by what we call Tensor Beam transmission, which uses a type of radio with which we are only vaguely familiar, and which I couldn’t possibly attempt to describe now. However, the mental images of the person wishing to transmit are picked up electrically amplified and modulated into a tensor beam, which is directed to the person to whom the transmission is addressed, and within whose brain the mental images are recreated. The transmissions are therefore very precise, and independent of language. I have had some experience with these transmissions myself and can say that they are like nothing within the conventional experiences of earth people.”

In the rest of the interview Wilbert Smith discusses what the aliens look like, the effect of the extraterrestrial idea on religion, secrecy, and a number of other topics. It should be noted in the interview that Wilbert Smith never used the word UFO. This is because from the very beginning Smith was aware that the phenomena was extraterrestrial, and that UFO was a word developed by the U.S.A.F. in 1952 to muddy the waters for investigators. According to Smith’s son Jim Smith, shortly before his death in 1962 Wilbert called his son in, and told him that he had in fact seen the alien bodies from a crash, and had been shown a crashed flying saucer outside of Washington D.C., while conducting the official Canadian investigation. The 1961 interview continues.

Q: Do you believe that flying saucers are real?

A: Yes. I am convinced that they are just as real and tangible as most things we deal with in our every day lives.

Q: Why do you think they are real?

A: Because thousands of people have seen them, many under circumstances, which virtually preclude misinterpretation, many of these sightings have been coordinated with radar fixes. Photographs have been taken and physical evidence has been accumulated.

Q: Have you ever seen a flying saucer yourself?

A: I have seen several objects which I concluded were flying saucers simply because they couldn’t be anything else.

Q: Would you please describe such a sighting?

A; Last year, I think it was August 16, (Echo 1 was launched August 12, 1960) right after the launching of Echo I, my wife and I, and a couple of friends, were outside sky-gazing to see the passage of Echo 1 which was due about ten minutes to nine. At about a quarter to nine a bright object came from the south at an apparent speed about twice the expected speed of echo, and traveled almost due north. As it approached, and when viewed through binoculars, it appeared to be a steady brilliant white light with a flashing electric blue light superimposed on it. At first the rate of flashing was not apparent as it was above the flicker frequency, but as it approached the frequency of the flicker slowed down until it was about one per second as it passed overhead. As it proceeded northward it suddenly made a sharp right hand turn and headed due west and disappeared into the western sky, with the blue light still flashing. There was no noise and the apparent speed was about the same as a jet flying at 10,000 feet. About five or so minutes later Echo 1 sailed majestically into view from the southwest as much less than half the apparent speed of the previous object.

Q: Where you able to see any shape of the object?

A: No. Just a bright white light, with the intense blue light with it.

Q: You said earlier that there was physical evidence, and that pictures existed supporting the reality of flying saucers. Would you please explain?

A: There have been over a hundred books and very many magazines published in the last ten or twelve years, the majority of which are predominately accounts of sightings, pictures, and descriptions of the physical evidence, which has accumulated. In the limited time available I could not possibly cover more than one or two such cases. However, here are a couple of interesting ones. (Two book quotes)

Q: Have you, yourself actually handled any material believed to be from a flying saucer?

A: If by that you mean material substance showing evidence of fabrication through intelligent effort and not originating on this planet, I have. But I cannot say from my own knowledge that it was ever part of a flying saucer. Unfortunately, most of my contacts in this direction were through classified channels, which for some particular reason, which I could never fathom, insisted in “Classifying” these matters, and I am not at liberty to discuss them further.

Q: What about pictures?

A: I am naturally very skeptical about pictures since they are so very easy to fake, so unless I have taken the picture myself and participated in its developing, I would not like to offer any of them as authentic. I have taken a few myself, but I’m afraid that they are not very impressive. There are however, many pictures available, which, whether they are fakes or not, do check quite well with the many visual descriptions. Here are a few. (Shows a few photographs)

Q: How long have you been studying flying saucers?

A: I suppose I have always known that there were other intelligent beings in the universe other than ourselves, and that sooner or later they would visit us. In 1947 when the first wide spread publicity on flying saucers came about, I thought this was something worth thinking about and maybe investigating. However, I didn’t get around to active participation until 1950, when I was attending a rather slow-moving broadcasting conference in Washington D.C. and having some free time on my hands, I circulated around asking a few questions about flying saucers, which stirred up a hornet’s nest. I found that the U.S. government had a highly classified project set up to study them, so I reasoned that with so much smoke maybe I should look for the fire. So I set about gathering as much sighting data as I could get a hold of and analyzing it, from which I concluded that there was a 91% probability that the saucers were real, and a 60% probability that they were alien craft of some kind.

Q: What is the “official” view of flying saucers?

A: I don’t even know if there is one, in Canada. In the United States there have been so many contradictory statements made that I doubt if anyone could sort them out. However, I don’t think it really matters much anyway because the saucers are here and our opinions regarding them are not going to change matters. It has been my experience that no one who takes even a little time to study the evidence available publicly remains skeptic very long. This is quite apart from those who have had access and studied the larger files of evidence collected by private and semi-official organizations.

Q: How widespread is the interest in flying saucers?

A: I really don’t know, but I think that most people are prepared to take them in their stride, along with atomic energy and earth circling satellites. I have encountered very few really died in the wool skeptics. Judging from the large number of saucer clubs, one or two in each city, and the number of publications available I would say that the interest was considerable.

Q: Since you say that you have been active in the study of flying saucers for over ten years, what have you found out about them?

A: that is a tall order and would take a good many hours. Most of it is available in reliable bookstores anyway, so I only propose to cover the highlights here. There is much evidence that people who build and fly flying saucers are people very much like us. They have been seen on many occasions and there are many claims of personal contact having been established with them. Communications with these people tell us that they are our distant relatives; that we are descendants of their colonists on this planet, and that they still regard us as brothers even though we don’t often act like it. There is much evidence that the technology of these people is quite a bit ahead of ours, and that through study of the behavior of the saucers and from the alleged communications we have been able to piece together some of this technology, and it is amazing to say the least. We are informed that these people are really civilized, in that they regard all men as brothers; that they do not have wars, and live under conditions of personal freedom of which we cannot conceive.

Q: Have you any indication of why the saucers are here at this time?

A: there is much evidence in history, legend and the Bible, that flying saucers have visited this planet on many occasions in the past and that the present visitation is nothing new; it is simply a bit more intense than in the past and we have better news dissemination means now. I think that these people from elsewhere are concerned with our playing with atomic energy, and about our plans for space travel and interplanetary exploration and conquest. I am sure that they do not hold us in very high esteem, and are worried about what we might do if we ever got loose in space armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons.

Q: Have you any ideas about how flying saucers operate?

A: As I said before, the technology of these people from elsewhere is quite a bit ahead of ours, and they have an understanding of the realities of this universe that we are just approaching. We have started at the effects and speculated towards the causes, whereas they started at the cause and worked towards the effects, with the result that they are not nearly so self-limited in science as we are.

Our observations indicate that the saucers can hover indefinitely in one place, or they can dart off with very high accelerations. Also, they can change direction quickly; all this with utter disregard of the laws of inertia, as we understand them. From this we conclude that they must understand these laws better that we do and have found ways of getting around the situation. Our own work along these lines, aided by tips from outside, indicates that the trick is through gravity control wherein the earth’s gravity field is bent to accommodate the action required.

Q: That sounds quite technical, but could you explain it further.

A: I’m afraid not, and I am sure that you will appreciate the reasons, which should be fairly obvious.

Q: I know this may be a hot question, but how do you think flying saucers affect religion?

A: As far as I can determine, these people from elsewhere are a great deal more religious than we are. They believe in a Supreme Creator, the brotherhood and divinity of Man, and a plan for the evolution of all. To these people, their religion is a matter of daily reality, not just Sunday profession, and they certainly seem to practice what we preach. I can find no contradictions with any of the religions of this planet.

Q: Do you have any idea where these people come from?

A: I am informed trough the many alleged contacts that these people come from everywhere; that there is no place in the universe where men can live that he does not live.

Q: How about traveling about in the universe? Doesn’t it take a terribly long time?

A: I am afraid our ideas about certain things are due for a severe revision in the not to distant future. I am informed that time is not at all what we think it is, but is in fact variable. Also, that the velocity of light is not at all a limiting velocity. It merely appears so to us because we can’t see any faster. I understand that these people from elsewhere can and do travel about a great deal and I’m sure they don’t take years and years to do it.

Q: You seem to have a great deal of inside information about these things; what are you doing about it? Are you bringing it to the attention of the scientists?

A: I have made no secret of the information with which I am entrusted, and will gladly pass it on to anyone who is sincerely interested and wants to learn. But I feel that I have no obligation whatsoever to force this knowledge on anyone or to interfere in his or her chosen pattern of thinking. I know these things to be true, and all the opinions to the contrary aren’t going to change things. When the time is right they will be accepted. In the meantime, I am NOT a missionary. I am concentrating my efforts on increasing my own understanding and the understanding of those who work with me in this area.

_______________________________

I wish to thank Nick Balaskas who recovered this interview from the files of the late Wilbert Smith. The Smith files are held in the nation’s capitol at the University of Ottawa.
Πηγη: http://www.presidentialufo.com/smith_interview.htm

[dhatz]

Παντως μια φορα που ειδα UFO, ενιωσα ενα σχετικο δεος / ανατριχιασα. Και ας μην ηταν τιποτα φοβερο.. εβγαινα στο μπαλκονι και εκεινη την ωρα συνειδητοποιησα οτι ακριβως απο πανω υπαρχει ενα ufo που κινειται σε μεγαλο υψος, με τεραστια ταχυτητα κανοντας σπειροειδη κινηση. Καπως ετσι:

(
)
(
)

Αλλα με μεγαλο ευρος σπειρας και κοντα η μια με την αλλη. Αν ηταν ανθρωπινη κατασκευη, αυτες οι στροφες θα διελυαν οτιδηποτε ανθρωπινο.. μιλαμε για πανω απο 100G επιταχυνσεων :shock:

Επειδή ΠΡΟΦΑΝΩΣ δεν μπορεί να είδες αυτό που είδες, διότι τέτοια πράγματα δεν υπάρχουν, ήσουν θύμα των πειραμάτων ελέγχου συνείδησης της CIA... είτε είδες την Αφροδίτη/μετεωρίτη/πουλιά/συννεφο/κλπ (για να αστειευτούμε λιγακι με τους φίλους οπαδούς της Επίπεδης Γης).

Σοβαρά τώρα, αν αναφέρεσαι για κίνηση στον κάθετο άξονα (οπως το δείχνεις, κι όχι οριζόντιο v^v^v ) τότε η κίνηση που περιγράφεις είναι γνωστή σαν corkscrew (από το σχήμα τιρμπουσόν που βγαζουμε το πωμα απο μποτίλια κρασιου) και εχει αναφερθεί πολλές φορές.

Παντως, τα πιο ενδιαφέροντα περιστατικά θεασης UFO είναι προφανώς αυτά που το UFO είναι σε απόσταση αναπνοής λιγων μέτρων, που βλεπεις σχήμα, χρώμα και πως κινείται, οπως των παιδιων που εστειλα χτες. Μια θεαση UFO ομοια με τη δική τους και του Rendlesham forest στην Αγγλία το 1980 (σχήμα πυραμιδο-ειδές, κιτρινωπό χρώμα κλπ):


Report 2

My brother, his friend and I saw an orange pyramid-shaped object in the sky about 25 yards away from us and about 25 yards up.

We were kids at the time, but my recollections are for the most part vivid. 1st Object: Estimated height was about 7 feet at the apex. The base was probably about 7x7 feet also. The object appeared solid and metallic. My younger brother and I insist the object was orange, but his friend believed it to be greenish. 2nd Object: Estimated diameter was about 1 foot. The sphere was red and appeared luminescent. The first object appeared above a neighbor's house while we were standing on the sidewalk. It hovered above the house and some power lines.

The second object, a red sphere, came out of the object and descended about 10 feet below the first object. After the descent of the sphere, the pyramid object began to rise and move slowly toward the south-east. After traveling slowly for several hundred yards, it accelerated very quickly on its south-east path and disappeared. I can't recall what happened to the red sphere. I was about 12, my brother 9 and his friend about 10. My brother was rated gifted and talented, I was an above average student, and his friend had problems with school work and discipline and had been held back a grade. We lived at ((address deleted)) Street, in Fountain Valley. Neither my brother nor I have had additional experiences of this nature. We do not maintain contact with my brother's friend. I tell people occasionally about the events, while my brother chooses not to bring it up.
http://www.uforth.com/pyramid.htm

Το ειδαν απο αποσταση 25 γιάρδες είναι 22.8 μέτρα.
Οι διαστάσεις του UFO επίσης συμπίπτουν.

[dhatz]

Μια ενδιαφέρουσα δημοσίευση σχετικά με το παράδοξο του Φερμι ("Where are they?" = "Αν το σύμπαν βρίθει απο ζωή, τότε που είναι όλοι τους?" δηλ. γιατί δεν έχουμε δει ακόμα τους άλλους πολιτισμούς) που επιχειρεί να απαντήσει στα ερωτήματα που τέθηκαν στο παρελθόν και στο παρόν thread.

Source: UFO Skeptic
http://www.ufoskeptic.org/JBIS.pdf

Inflation-Theory Implications for Extraterrestrial Visitation
JBIS, Vol. 58, pp. 43-50, 2005

J. DEARDORFF1, B. HAISCH2, B. MACCABEE3 AND H.E. PUTHOFF4

1. 1689 S.W. Knollbrook Pl., Corvallis, Oregon 97333, USA.
2. National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena
(NARCAP), Post Office Box 1535, Vallejo, California, USA.
3. Fund for UFO Research, Post Office Box 277, Mt Rainier,
Maryland, 20712, USA.
4. Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin, 4030 W. Braker Ln.,
Suite 300, Austin, Texas 78759, USA.
Email: puthoff.nul

It has recently been argued that anthropic reasoning applied to
inflation theory reinforces the prediction that we should find
ourselves part of a large, galaxy-sized civilisation, thus
strengthening Fermi's paradox concerning "Where are they?"
Furthermore, superstring and M-brane theory allow for the
possibility of parallel universes, some of which in principle
could be habitable. In addition, discussion of such exotic
transport concepts as "traversable wormholes" now appears in the
rigorous physics literature. As a result, the "We are alone"
solution to Fermi's paradox, based on the constraints of earlier
20th century viewpoints, appears today to be inconsistent with
new developments in our best current physics and astrophysics
theories. Therefore we reexamine and reevaluate the present
assumption that extraterrestrials or their probes are not in the
vicinity of Earth, and argue instead that some evidence of their
presence might be found in certain high-quality UFO reports.
This study follows up on previous arguments that (1)
interstellar travel for advanced civilizations is not a priori
ruled out by physical principles and therefore may be
practicable, and (2) such advanced civilisations may value the
search for knowledge from uncontaminated species more than
direct, interspecies communication, thereby accounting for
apparent covertness regarding their presence.


Keywords: Fermi paradox, extraterrestrial hypothesis,
extraterrestrial visitation, UFO phenomenon, Condon Report, SETI

Το κυρίως κείμενο:

1. Introduction

The ever recurring question of why Earth has seemingly not been
visited by extraterrestrials (ETs) has received considerable
discussion under the topic of 'Fermi's paradox'. The problem
originated as a quip by Enrico Fermi to colleagues in Los Alamos
over lunch one day in 1950. Whether one assumes the existence of
only one other civilisation or of many alien civilisations in
our Milky Way galaxy, and whether one assumes colonisation
involving interstellar travel at near-light speed or far below,
diffusion modeling predicts colonisation or at least visitation
of all habitable planets in the galaxy on timescales of tens of
millions of years, far less than the approximate 13 x 109 year
age of the galaxy itself. Thus the paradox: Where are they [1]?

Theoretical possibilities unknown to Fermi make the paradox even
stronger today. One can now rationally conjecture about
prospects afforded by adjacent M-brane universes [2]. Indeed, if
the multidimensions underlying superstring and M-brane theory
are correct, there could be inhabited universes separated from
our own by minute, orthogonal distances. Also, anthropic
reasoning has recently been applied to inflation theory,
arriving once again at the conclusion that we should find
ourselves within an enormously larger galactic civilisation [3].
While the 'We are alone' solution to Fermi's paradox was once a
seemingly valid one, this answer is now incompatible with the
infinite universe and random self-sampling assumption consistent
with inflation theory. We thus find ourselves in the curious
position that current cosmological theory predicts that we
should be experiencing extraterrestrial visitation. At the same
time, current physics and astrophysics suggest that such
visitation may not be as impossible as had been thought.


2. Recent Scientific Advances

In recent astronomical discoveries, over 100 exoplanets have
been catalogued, with detection sensitivity now increased to the
point where, in one instance, a Jupiter-sized planet was deduced
to be in a Jupiter-like orbit around a Sol-like star [4]. In the
field of exobiology, much recent activity suggests that some of
the building blocks for life may originate in space as well as
be transported by meteorites [5- 6]. The possibility of
widespread panspermia has received new impetus [7-8]. These
findings and studies make plausible the hypothesis that there is
intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. This is, of course,
the fundamental assumption made by the proponents of SETI, the
Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence using microwave or
optical means of detection.

The extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH), that intelligent life
from 'elsewhere' in the universe could be visiting Earth, has
become less implausible through suggestions that the velocity-
of-light constraint=97 'they can't get here from there'=97is not as
restricting as had been assumed previously. This restriction has
its origin in the special theory of relativity, which we do not
question. However, within the context of general relativity (GR)
there are three approaches which may permit legitimately
bypassing this limit, given sufficiently advanced (perhaps by
millions of years!) knowledge of physics and technology.

One approach popularised by Thorne and Sagan concerns the
possibility of wormholes, or cosmic subways, a form of shortcut
through the space-time metric [9]. Using the standard GR as a
basis, certain mathematical requirements for traversable
wormholes have been derived and published in the scientific
literature and it appears that there is the possibility of
engineering a wormhole metric, at least in principle [10].

A second more recent approach published in the GR literature has
been dubbed the 'Alcubierre Warp Drive' [11-12]. Unlike the
speed of light limit through space, there is no limit to the
speed at which space itself might stretch. Faster than light
(FTL) relative motion is part of inflation theory, and
presumably the universe beyond the Hubble distance is receding
from us faster than c. It was shown that a spaceship contained
in a volume of Minkowski space could in principle make use of
FTL expansion of space-time behind and a similar contraction in
front, with the inconvenience of time dilation and untoward
accelerations being overcome. A related approach involves
constructing a 'Krasnikov tube' [13] to connect spatially remote
locales. Of course so-called exotic matter would be required for
either case.

If GR itself were to be reinterpreted in terms of a polarisable
vacuum as first proposed by Dicke [14], this would open the
possibility of a different type of metric engineering in which
the dielectric properties of the vacuum might be altered in such
a way as to raise the local propagation velocity of light. In
effect one would be creating a local index of refraction of less
than unity [15].

Finally, there is the conjectured possibility of making use of
the additional dimensionalities of M-brane and superstring
theory to transfer into adjacent universes where the speed of
light limit may be quite different and reentering our universe
at the desired location. This is by far the most speculative
possibility.

Clearly when it comes to engineering warp drive or wormhole
solutions, seemingly insurmountable obstacles emerge, such as
unattainable energy requirements [16] or the need for exotic
matter [17]. Thus, if success is to be achieved, it must rest on
some yet unforeseen breakthrough about which we can only
speculate, such as a technology to cohere otherwise random
vacuum fluctuations [18]. Nonetheless, the possibility of
reduced-time interstellar travel by advanced extraterrestrial
(ET) civilisations is not, as naive consideration might hold,
fundamentally ruled out by presently known physical principles.
ET knowledge of the physical universe may comprise new
principles which allow some form of FTL travel. This possibility
is to be taken seriously, since the average age of suitable
stars within the 'galactic habitable zone', in which the Earth
also resides, is found to be about 109 years older than the sun
[19] suggesting the possibility of civilizations extremely
advanced beyond our own.

There are further reasons why the 'We are alone' solution to
Fermi's paradox should perhaps be set aside in favor of the ETH.
A previously preferred solution, that biogenesis is an
exceedingly rare event in conjunction with both panspermia and
interstellar travel being inoperative [1], is now scarcely
tenable in light of the cosmological considerations already
discussed. The ETH appears to be the most viable remaining
solution, where 'ET' is taken in a general non-Earthly sense
that could include extra-dimensional realms, as in M-brane and
superstring theory. Given the highly advanced ET science and
technology to be expected in considerably older civilisations,
coupled with the many observational reports since WWII of highly
advanced technology seemingly operating at will within Earth's
skies, it is only logical to search for evidence of ET
visitations in at least a fraction of the ongoing, unexplainable
reports popularly referred to as 'UFO sightings.' Reluctance to
do so could result in our failure to realize that observations
of 'genuine' ET visitations have been occurring. This approach,
which we follow here, explores the likelihood that 'we actually
do belong to a large civilisation but are unaware of that fact'
[3].


3. U.S. Air Force Response (1947-1969)

Reports of unknown objects in the skies, appearing
as some sort of flying craft and exhibiting extraordinary
manoeuvres, first became known to the general
public in 1947. The first publicised sighting occurred
on June 24 of that year, after which there were many
hundreds of sightings during the following months.
The phenomenon has been continuing ever since
[20-24].

At first the U.S. Air Force collected the sighting reports for
analysis in its operation Project Sign (1948-1949). This was
succeeded by Project Grudge (1949-1952) and then Project Blue
Book (1952-1969) [20,25] . Some 20% of Project Blue Book's
sightings from 1953-1965 were left unexplained, if their
'insufficient data' category is included [22]. The Battelle
Memorial Institute (BMI; Columbus, Ohio) discovered, in their
study of 3,201 reports from 1947 through 1952, that the
percentage of unknowns (unexplainable sightings) increased with
increasing quality of the sighting information and reliability
of the observers [21]. A surprisingly high percentage, 30%, of
the civilian sightings, and an even more surprising 38%, of the
military sightings rated as excellent in quality were listed as
unknown. On the other hand, only about 15% of the civilian and
20% of the military sightings rated as poor were unknown. The
increase in the percentage of unknowns with increasing quality
of the report is an unexpected result if sightings were all
explainable as mistakes (failure to correctly identify the
sighted phenomenon) by either the observer(s) or the scientists
who analysed the sightings. In this collection of 3,201
sightings none were listed as hoaxes and only 1.5% were listed
as caused by psychological effects. This result discovered
during the several year long BMI study refutes the claim, made
in the Condon Report [22], that UFO reports are from 'less well
informed individuals,' who are 'not necessarily reliable.' It is
worthy of note that Condon had access to the results of the BMI
study but there is no reference to it in the Condon Report.
Project Blue Book culminated in 1969 with the government
sponsored Condon Report [22]. In the opening section of the
Report its director concluded that, after years of
investigation, the U.S. Air Force had found nothing truly
new=97nothing that supported claims of new physics or the ETH=97and
that continued investigation probably would not find anything
truly new in the future. The Report recommended that the Air
Force end its investigation project, which it did in late 1969.


4. The Condon Report (1968)

In the late 1960's, the U.S. Air Force issued a contract to the
University of Colorado to carry out a scientific study of
evidence concerning the UFO phenomenon. The director of the
project was Prof. Edward U. Condon, a distinguished and
influential physicist who made no secret of his opinion even at
the outset that no substantive evidence for extraterrestrial
visitation was liable to result. The study was relatively brief
(2 years) and had a notably low budget (app. $500K) for a
serious scientific study. When the Condon Report was released in
1968, the American scientific community accepted its apparently
negative conclusion concerning evidence for extraterrestrial
visitation in a generally uncritical way, and to some extent
even an enthusiastic way since it offered an end to a
troublesome situation. An endorsement of the Report by the
National Academy of Sciences took place following an unusually
rapid review and the Air Force quickly used the Report as a
justification to terminate any further public involvement with
the topic.

The negative conclusion of the Report is more apparent than real
however, since there is a substantial discrepancy between the
conclusion in the "Summary of the Study" written by Condon
singlehandedly, and the conclusion one could reasonably draw
from the evidence presented in the main body of the Report. Such
a dichotomy was possible because the study was a project for
which the director, Condon, had sole authority; it was not the
work of a committee whose members would have to reach some
consensus conclusion. An analysis of the Condon Report by
Sturrock [26] details the many disagreements between Condon's
dismissive summary and the actual data.

Given the thousand-page length of the Report, one can safely
assume that very few in the scientific community would have
devoted the time necessary to read the entire document. The
impact of the Report was thus largely due to Condon's leveraging
his prestigious scientific reputation into an acceptance of his
own personal views as representing the apparent outcome of a
scientific investigation. Indeed, as Sturrock documents, Condon
actually took no part in the investigations and indicated the
conclusion he intended to draw well before the data were
properly examined, hardly a scientific approach.

The portion of the Condon Report that contains its sighting
analyses does not support the "Summary of the Study" written by
Condon [26]. Many of the events presented within its Case
Studies section do fall into the 'unidentified' category of
UFOs, for which the Report's definition was, in essence: 'A
puzzling stimulus for a report of something seen in the sky or
landed on the earth that could not be identified as having an
ordinary natural origin.' In a detailed review of this Report,
however, it was noted that 'The sheer bulk of the report, much
of it "scientific padding", cannot conceal from anyone who
studies it closely that it examines only a tiny fraction of the
really puzzling UFO reports, and that its scientific
argumentation is often unsatisfactory. Of roughly ninety cases
that it specifically confronts, more than thirty are conceded to
be unexplained' [27]. Four of the cases, reanalysed and reported
in detail at the 1969 AAAS Symposium, disclosed how unscientific
the Condon Report's treatment of them had been; the reanalyses
have since gone unrefuted. Hence we cannot agree with the Condon
Report's assertion that the phenomenon provides no new subjects
for science to explore, given that many sightings were left
unexplained. Furthermore, in many of the cases that the Report
claimed to have identified, that goal was achieved merely
through assuming that the witnesses had seen something differing
in detail from what they had reported. Also, a committee of the
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics in 1971 found
'it difficult to ignore the small residue of well-documented but
unexplainable cases that form the hard core of the UFO
controversy'[28]. Clearly, the Condon Report was left in an
unsatisfactory state [20,24-26,29-30].

The primary conclusion of the Condon panel sidestepped the main
issue, the failure to explain every sighting, by saying: 'The
evidence presented on Unidentified Flying Objects shows no
indication that these phenomena constitute a direct physical
threat to national security' [22]. This is not inconsistent,
however, with some fraction of unexplained reports representing
actual ET visitations.


5. Re-Evaluation of the Phenomenon Needed

5.1 Sightings Since the Condon Report

The self-inconsistency of the Condon Report, along with the
strengthening of Fermi's paradox through recent developments in
cosmology, physics, astronomy and astrobiology, are but two
reasons to reevaluate the UFO phenomenon. Another reason is that
remarkable sightings did not cease with the publication of the
Condon Report in 1969. Many detailed sightings since then have
become available for examination. Scientists should not feel
reluctant to study these inasmuch as the Report's executive
summary stated that 'any scientist with adequate training and
credentials who does come up with a clearly defined, specific
proposal for study [of UFO reports] should be supported.'

One example of sightings worth studying are those that occurred
on December 31, 1978 off the northeast coast of South Island,
New Zealand. These involved several channels of information
recorded on tape and film during the sightings, correlated
visual air- and ground-radar detections and light phenomena
recorded on colour movie film as well as reports by the eight
witnesses who were involved. Analysis of the recorded data and
of the witness testimony indicates that unknown objects emitting
bright light were detected on radar, filmed and apparently moved
in response to the motions of the airplane carrying the
witnesses. The sightings have defied all mundane explanations
[31-32].

Some investigations of unexplainable sightings have been
sponsored by governments outside the U.S. Since 1977 the French
Space Agency has carried out an official investigation of UFO
reports with its project GEPAN, later called SEPRA. In the
Belgium sighting wave of 1989-90, civilian and military
officials cooperated in sharing eyewitness, radar and video-
image data of triangular-shaped craft.

5.2 Withheld Information Now Available

The Condon investigators did not have full access to the
information and analysis compiled previously by the U.S. Air
Force Office of Intelligence (AFOIN) or to all the information
collected by Project Blue Book.

Much of this information has been disclosed in the years since
1968. The information release has come about on five fronts.
First, the U.S. Air Force released the complete files of Project
Blue Book in 1975. This release included the previously
unavailable files of the Air Force Office of Special
Investigation (AFOSI).

Second, the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, which went into
effect in the mid 1970s, resulted in the release of relevant
information from other agencies (Federal Bureau of
Investigation: FBI, in 1977; Central Intelligence Agency: CIA,
in 1978; etc.), though often in a censored form [23-24].

A third new source of information is the collection of
previously withheld reports and analyses carried out by the
AFOIN in the late 1940s and early 1950s. This information has
been released in the last 20 years as a result of standard
declassification requirements for old documents. It shows that
Air Force intelligence privately concluded that as many as 5% of
the sightings were unexplainable even though they were
apparently accurate reports made by credible observers, thus
contradicting the public statements of the Air Force that all
sightings could be explained. The documents provide an
explanation as to why Air Force intelligence told the FBI in
August and again in October, 1952, that some top Air Force
officials were seriously considering the 'interplanetary'
explanation [33].

Fourth, governments of countries other than the United States,
over the last 25 years, have released relevant information
collected by their armed services and police. Not only has the
French government, through GEPAN and SEPRA, released sighting
documents but also England's Ministry of Defense recently
released a number of documents. The governments of Spain and
Canada also released documents in the 1970s and 1980s. Moreover,
some governments besides that of France have official
investigative groups on this topic. In 1997, in response to
civilian and military sightings over the previous years, the
Chilean Air Force formed the Committee for the Study of
Anomalous Phenomena (acronym, CEFAA in Spanish) directed by a
former Air Force general and headquartered in the Technical
School of Aeronautics in Santiago. One of us (Maccabee) was
invited to Chile in 1999 to lecture at a symposium sponsored by
the CEFAA and to discuss the sightings. The Peruvian Air Force
set up a similar group in 2001. Brazil and Uruguay also have
comparable investigative groups.

A fifth new source of information not available or utilised by
the Condon group consists of the many witnesses to events in the
1940-1960 decades who had worked for the government or the
military and after reaching retirement age, have come forward to
divulge their first-hand knowledge [34]. They have felt it was
more important for the citizens to know what has been taking
place than to continue to obey instructions to maintain silence
about it. A reluctance to report UFO events arose because of a
curtain of ridicule which, since the 1950s, had settled over the
subject. It was induced in part by the CIA's 1953 Robertson
panel that recommended a debunking programme against the reality
of the phenomenon [20,22-23].

The debunking is most often implemented by an authority figure
asserting, at his own volition and without interviewing the
witnesses, that whatever was observed and reported as
extraordinary was instead the misidentification of something
mundane. This is demeaning to sincere, credible witnesses. The
major news media quickly picked up on sarcastic phrases like
'little green men' and 'UFO buffs', then gradually weaned
themselves away from the topic=97reporters, editors and corporate
owners fear ridicule, whether just or unjust, as much as do
scientists and politicians. The refusal of the U.S. Air Force in
the 1950s and 1960s to release sighting data it had collected
only added to the problem, since evidence collected by the
government was not available to support the witnesses [33].

The first director of the CIA assessed the situation in 1960 as
follows: 'Behind the scenes, highranking Air Force officers are
soberly concerned about UFOs. But, through official secrecy and
ridicule, many citizens are led to believe the unknown flying
objects are nonsense=85 to hide the facts, the Air Force has
silenced its personnel' [35]. The Condon Report also added to
the problem, since it demonstrated that men of science could
simply allege that witnesses are mistaken or dishonest and they
would be believed by most of their colleagues even though they
had no evidence to back up their allegations. This in turn led
to greater reluctance on the part of witnesses to come forward.
As a result, 'the most credible UFO witnesses are often those
most reluctant to come forward with a report of the event they
have witnessed' [27]. This ridicule factor has prevented many
serious investigators from even attempting to report their
findings within the journals preferred by most scientists.
Therefore, one of the recommendations made by the moderator of a
1997 panel of scientists is that journal editors should change
their policy of refusing to even seriously consider publishing
articles related to the UFO phenomenon, so that this difficulty
may be alleviated [36].


6. Inferring an ET Strategy

If one allows that at least some unexplainable sightings may be
manifestations of extraterrestrial intelligence, then there is
yet another reason for reevaluation: a growing recognition over
the past two decades that a large part of the behavior
manifested can be viewed as being quite rational. The topic of
ET behavior has received considerable discussion in connection
with SETI in the past three decades. SETI has proceeded on the
assumption that Fermi's paradox is to be solved through
continued and enhanced searching of the sky for electromagnetic
signals indicative of ET communications [37]. Several possible
reasons for lack of success to date have been proposed [1,37-
38].

Since the 1970s advocates of a covert ET presence in our
vicinity have also been advancing their hypotheses or scenarios.
They reject as improbable the assumption that space-faring ETs
must be dominated by the most evil and aggressive of their kind=97
an assumption whose consequence would be that we should not be
existing as a freely developing civilisation within a fully
colonised and/or explored galaxy. Contact optimists instead
presume that many advanced ET groups are at least as ethical as
we are, while still attending to their own safety and security.

The ET motivation for space travel could be to increase their
knowledge through exploration of space rather than to colonise
and seek domination [39]. Thus hypotheses have been set forth
regarding why such ETs would be aware of our presence but not
yet have contacted us overtly. Among these are the zoo, nursery
and quarantine or embargo hypotheses [1,38,40-42]. Most of these
posit that the ETs involved have frequently scouted us out semi-
covertly and have concluded that we are either not yet mature
enough for open contact, or not prepared for it, since any
abrupt, overt contact could cause societal chaos and
governmental downfalls. Also postulated is that ET interference
with our society would prematurely bring an end to our
civilisation's continued development if it occurred before our
knowledge has progressed to the point that we could understand
where the aliens could have originated and how great their head
start over us could be [39].

A serious inconsistency in this reasoning, however, is that
maintenance of total ET covertness towards Earth and the solar
system would still lead to societal chaos whenever the
covertness or embargo was eventually lifted, unless the ETs
carried out a programme of gradual disclosure=97a 'leaky' embargo
[1,43]. Although the zoo or embargo hypothesis may be
unverifiable, the leaky-embargo hypothesis may be verifiable if
the UFO evidence is taken into account. Much of this evidence
appears to constitute just such a leak in the embargo: a grass-
roots educational programme in the form of the phenomenon, which
has been in operation since 1947, if not before.

Many sightings have been of a nature to attract attention to
their craft and let isolated groups of witnesses know that its
occupants are aware of us [24,44]. A key category of such cases
involves reports wherein persons within a traveling vehicle
frantically witness an object pacing them even though their
automobile or aircraft makes turns that rule out the sighting of
an astronomical or other ordinary object as any explanation.
Similarly, in a number of the aircraft cases the unknown object,
which was either pacing the aircraft or presenting itself to it,
was detected on radar as well as visually [23-25,27].

The object's extraordinary appearance, manoeuvreability and oft-
times coincidental interference with the vehicle's electrical
system additionally rule out mundane explanations [23-25].

Although individual, localised and usually brief sightings may
have provided sufficient evidence to be convincing to the
observers and sighting analysts, the fact is that, since the
widely-reported sightings began in 1947, no event has persisted
in a prominent place a sufficient number of hours at a time, or
demonstrated its abilities to enough witnesses at a time, for
the news media to congregate and publicise it to the world. Nor
have they left quite enough evidence behind to be totally
convincing to very many scientists [25]. We suspect that this
chary behavior may be no accident.

To put it another way, from the viewpoint of investigators
studying such phenomena, individual close-encounter and other
sightings can be very intrusive and overt. However, from the
viewpoint of the scientific community and society as a whole,
this is not the case, because of the relative rarity in time and
space of convincing sightings and because of the limited numbers
of witnesses in most instances. The inference is that, by not
providing sufficient evidence to make their reality totally
obvious to scientists and society in general, the ETs are
following a strategy or programme that avoids inflicting
catastrophic shock to society as a whole, which any overt
contact could cause, while preparing us for eventual open
contact. This could say something about their level of ethics.

Proposing a certain level of ET ethics is not new; it was
suggested in 1981 that advanced ETs may abide by a Codex
Galactica that would require them to treat emerging
civilisations delicately [1,45]. Such a standard of behavior is
consistent with reality of the UFO phenomenon and the fact that
not in the past 56 years, nor in past millennia, have we been
colonised, conquered or exterminated, nor has society been
traumatised by any ETs or by their sometimes postulated robotic
probes [1,41]. It is also consistent with the failure of
investigative panels to find that UFOs constitute any direct
threat to national security. On the other hand, it appears all
too evident that ETs have not intervened in world affairs in any
benevolent manner that would have forestalled human warfare,
famine and disease. In fact, ample cases exist wherein the
witnesses, when too close, were injured or harmed. Other cases
exist, however, in which a witness was healed of some injury or
medical condition [46]. All this suggests that ET interactions
with humans are based on a neutrally benevolent ethical level
overall.


7. Conclusions

Despite the UFO phenomenon having continued now for over two
generations, the huge technological head start of the presumed
ETs would still come as a great shock to many scientists as well
as citizenry, as the Brookings Report indicated [47]. It could
be so great as to seriously challenge our consensual reality, a
not insignificant danger. The implication that we would be
powerless relative to their presumed capabilities and
evolutionary advantage may be most unwelcome, with it being no
surprise that science would have difficulty coming to terms with
the situation [48]. Nevertheless, the reality of the phenomenon
and of our having long since been discovered by advanced ETs now
may be more probable than that Fermi's paradox is to be resolved
through either the non-existence of advanced ETs or their
inability to explore or colonise the galaxy. Hence open
scientific research on the subject is needed with special
attention paid to high quality UFO reports exhibiting apparent
indications that ET intelligence and strategy are involved.


8. Acknowledgments

We thank P. Sturrock of Stanford University and T. Roe of the
National Aviation Reporting Center on Anomalous Phenomena
(NARCAP) for suggested improvements.


References

1. S. Webb, "If the Universe is Teeming with Aliens=85Where is
Everybody? Fifty Solutions to the Fermi Paradox and the Problem
of Extraterrestrial Life", Copernicus Books, New York, 2002.

2. E. Dudas, "Theory and phenomenology of type I strings and
M- theory", Class. Quant. Grav., 17, R41, 2000, (hep-ph/0006190).

3. K.D. Olum, "Conflict between anthropic reasoning and
observation", ANALYSIS, 64, p.1, 2004, (gr-qc/ 0303070).

4. S. Udry, M. Mayor, and N.C. Santos, "Statistical properties
of exoplanets. I. The period distribution: Constraints for the
migration scenario", Astron. Astrophys. , 407, p.369, 2003.

5. B.C. Coughlin, "Searching for an alien haven in the heavens",
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 98, p.796, 2001.

6. D.P.Glavin, O. Botta, G. Cooper, and J.L. Bada,
"Identification of amino acid signatures in carbonaceous
chondrites", Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. , 98, p.2138, 2001.

7. M.K. Wallis and N.C. Wickramasinghe, "Interstellar transfer
of planetary microbiota", Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 348, p.52,
2004.

8. W.M. Napier, "A mechanism for interstellar panspermia", Mon.
Not. R. Astron. Soc., 348, p.46, 2004.

9. M.S. Morris, and K.S. Thorne, "Wormholes in spacetime and
their use for interstellar travel: A tool for teaching general
relativity", Am. J. Phys., 56, p.395, 1988.

10. M. Visser, "Lorentzian Wormholes: From Einstein to Hawking",
AIP Press, Woodbury, New York, 1996.

11. M. Alcubierre, "The warp drive: Hyper-fast travel within
general relativity", Class. Quant. Grav., 11, p.L73, 1994.

12. H.E. Puthoff, "SETI, the velocity-of-light limitation, and
the Alcubierre warp drive: An integrating overview", Phys.
Essays, 9, p.156, 1996.

13. S.V. Krasnikov, "Hyperfast Interstellar Travel in General
Relativity", Phys. Rev. D, 57, p.4760, 1998.

14. R.H. Dicke, "Gravitation without a Principle of
Equivalence", Rev. Mod. Phys., 29, p.363, 1957.

15. H.E. Puthoff, "Polarizable-vacuum (PV) approach to general
relativity", Found. Phys., 32, p.927, 2002.

16. M.J. Pfenning, and L.H. Ford, "The unphysical nature of warp
drive", Class. Quant. Grav., 14, p.1743, 1997.

17. M. Visser, S. Kar, and N. Dadhich, "Traversable wormholes
with arbitrarily small energy condition violations", Phys. Rev.
Lett., 90, p.201102-1, 2003.

18. H.E. Puthoff, S.R. Little, and M. Ibison, "Engineering the
zero-point field and polarizable vacuum for interstellar
flight", JBIS, 55, p.137, 2002.

19. C.H. Lineweaver, Y. Fenner, and B.K. Gibson, "The galactic
habitable zone and the age distribution of complex life in the
Milky Way", Science, 303, p.59. 2004.

20. D.M. Jacobs, "The UFO Controversy in America", Indiana
University Press, Bloomington, Indiana, 1975.

21. Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14, 1955.

22. E.U. Condon, and D.S. Gillmor, "Final Report of the
Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects", Bantam Books,
New York, 1969.

23. R.M. Dolan, "UFOs and the National Security State", Hampton
Roads Publishing Co., Charlottesville, Virginia, 2002.

24. R.H. Hall, "The UFO Evidence", vol. II, Scarecrow Press,
Lanham, Maryland, 2001.

25. P.A.Sturrock, "The UFO Enigma: A New Review of the Physical
Evidence", Warner Books, New York, 1999.

26. P.A. Sturrock, "An analysis of the Condon Report on the
Colorado UFO project", J. Sci. Exploration, 1, p.75, 1987.

27. J.E. McDonald, "Science in Default", in "UFO's-A Scientific
Debate", Eds. C. Sagan and T. Page, Cornell University Press,
Ithaca, NY, 1972, p.52, 1972.

28. S.J. Dick, "The Biological Universe: The Twentieth-Century
Extraterrestrial Life Debate and the Limits of Science",
Cambridge University Press, England, 1996.

29. D.R. Saunders and R.R. Harkins, "UFOs? Yes! Where the Condon
Committee Went Wrong: The inside story by an ex-member of the
official study group", World Publishing, New York, 1969.

30. J.E. McDonald, Review of "The Condon Report, Scientific
Study of Unidentified Flying Objects", Icarus, 11, p.443, 1969.

31. B. Maccabee, "Photometric properties of an unidentified
bright object seen off the coast of New Zealand", Appl. Opt.,
19, p.1745, 1980.

32. B. Maccabee, "Analysis and discussion of the images of a
cluster of periodically flashing lights filmed off the coast of
New Zealand", J. Sci. Exploration, 1, p.149, 1987.

33. B. Maccabee, "UFO-FBI Connection: The Secret History of the
Government's Cover-Up", Llewellyn Publications, St. Paul,
Minnesota, 2000.

34. See, e.g., http://www.nicap.org/bigsurdir.htm

35. R. Hillenkoetter, New York Times, February 28, 1960.

36. P.A. Sturrock, et al. "Physical evidence related to UFO
reports: The proceedings of a workshop held at the Pocantico
Conference Center, Tarrytown, New York, September 29-October 4,
1997", J. Sci. Exploration, 12, p.179, 1998.

37. J. Tarter, Book review (astronomy): "Ongoing debate over
cosmic neighbors", Science, 299, p.46, 2003.

38. B. Gato-Rivera, "Brane worlds, the subanthropic principle,
and the undetectability conjecture", (physics/ 0308078), 2003.

39. T.B.H. Kuiper, and M. Morris, "Searching for
extraterrestrial civilizations", Science, 196, p.616, 1977.

40. J.A. Ball, "The zoo hypothesis", Icarus, 19, p.347, 1973.

41. G.D. Brin, "The 'Great silence': The controversy concerning
extraterrestrial intelligent life", Q. J. R. Astron. Soc., 24,
p.283, 1983.

42. E.R. Harrison, "Cosmology", Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 1981.

43. J.W. Deardorff, "Possible extraterrestrial strategy for
Earth", Q. J. R. Astron. Soc., 27, p.94, 1986.

44. R. Haines, "CE-5 Close Encounters of the Fifth Kind",
Sourcebooks, Naperville, Illinois, 1998.

45. W.I. Newman and C. Sagan, "Galactic civilizations:
Population dynamics and interstellar diffusion", Icarus ,

46, p.293, 1981. 46. P.E. Dennett, and C. Dennett, "UFO
Healings", Granite Publishing Group, Columbus, North Carolina,
1996.

47. U.S. House of Representatives Report No. 242, "Proposed
Studies on the Implications of Peaceful Space Activities for
Human Affairs", 1961.

48. P.A. Sturrock, "Extraterrestrial intelligent life", Q. J. R.
Astron. Soc., 19, p.521, 1989.

[Xguru]

Κανένα compilation με τα καλύτερα videakia του thread να έχουμε να τα δείχνουμε; Χάνεται κανείς στις 30 σελίδες...

PS. Τελευταία ασχολείται και η Δρούζα ένθερμα με το θέμα των εξωγήινων, να ανησυχώ;
Οι εξωγήινοι να έχουν internet;

[MNP-10]

Σοβαρά τώρα, αν αναφέρεσαι για κίνηση στον κάθετο άξονα (οπως το δείχνεις, κι όχι οριζόντιο v^v^v ) τότε η κίνηση που περιγράφεις είναι γνωστή σαν corkscrew (από το σχήμα τιρμπουσόν που βγαζουμε το πωμα απο μποτίλια κρασιου) και εχει αναφερθεί πολλές φορές.

Αυτο ερχοταν απο πισω μου και πηγαινε προς τα εμπρος μου κανοντας δεξια-αριστερα στον οριζοντιο αξονα. Οπως κινειται το φιδι δηλαδη. Η ταχυτητα του ηταν απιστευτη γιατι παρ'ολο οτι κινουταν και εστριβε ετσι, καλυψε τον ορατο οριζοντα σε 1-2 δευτερολεπτα το πολυ και εξαφανισθηκε στο βαθος του..Σαν αντικειμενο δεν φαινοταν καποιο σχημα - μονο ενα εντονο φως (που ηταν και αυτο που μου τραβηξε την προσοχη).

[ypopto_mpifteki]

Αυτο ερχοταν απο πισω μου και πηγαινε προς τα εμπρος μου κανοντας δεξια-αριστερα στον οριζοντιο αξονα. Οπως κινειται το φιδι δηλαδη. Η ταχυτητα του ηταν απιστευτη γιατι παρ'ολο οτι κινουταν και εστριβε ετσι, καλυψε τον ορατο οριζοντα σε 1-2 δευτερολεπτα το πολυ και εξαφανισθηκε στο βαθος του..Σαν αντικειμενο δεν φαινοταν καποιο σχημα - μονο ενα εντονο φως (που ηταν και αυτο που μου τραβηξε την προσοχη).

Wormhole tech!

Ευκλείδια και μη Ευκλείδια Γεωμετρία.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Euclidean_geometry


Euclidean geometry is modelled by our notion of a "flat plane." The simplest model for elliptic geometry is a sphere, where lines are "great circles" (such as the equator or the meridians on a globe), and points opposite each other are identified (considered to be the same). Even after the work of Lobachevsky, Gauss, and Bolyai, the question remained: does such a model exist for hyperbolic geometry? This question was answered by Eugenio Beltrami, in 1868, who first showed that a surface called the pseudosphere has the appropriate curvature to model a portion of hyperbolic space, and in a second paper in the same year, defined the Klein model, the Poincaré disk model, and the Poincaré half-plane model which model the entirety of hyperbolic space, and used this to show that Euclidean geometry and hyperbolic geometry were equiconsistent, so that hyperbolic geometry was logically consistent if Euclidean geometry was. (The reverse implication follows from the horosphere model of Euclidean geometry.)

The development of non-Euclidean geometries proved very important to physics in the 20th century. Given the limitation of the speed of light, velocity additions necessitate the use of hyperbolic geometry. Einstein's Theory of Relativity describes space as generally flat (i.e., Euclidean), but elliptically curved (i.e., non-Euclidean) in regions near where matter is present. Because the universe expands (see the hubble constant), the space where no matter exists could be described by using a hyperbolic model. This kind of geometry, where the curvature changes from point to point, is called riemannian geometry.

Μπορούμε να υπολογίσουμε ιδιότητες εκτός του Ευκλείδιου χώρου που παρουσιάζουν θεωρητικά αρνητικό μέγεθος.
Αυτό είναι χρήσιμο π.χ. στη θεωρία της σχετικότητας του Αϊνστάιν που αποδέχεται φαινομενικά (για τις αισθήσεις μας) στρέβλωση του χώρου.
Ο Αϊνστάιν αποδεχώταν το Ευκλείδιο διάστημα, που στο μεγαλύτερο μέρος του εμφανίζεται επίπεδο (άδειος διαστημικός χώρος) αλλά σε περιοχές που υπάρχει ύλη εμφανίζει καμπυλώσεις (π.χ. πλανήτες)


Pseudosphere

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudosphere


A trick mathematicians have come up with to represent it is called the Poincaré model of hyperbolic geometry. By increasingly shrinking the pseudosphere as it goes further out towards the edge, it will fit into a circle, called the Poincaré disk; with the "edge" representing infinity. This is usually tessellated with equilateral triangles, or other polygons; which become increasingly distorted towards the edges, such that some vertices are shared by more polygons than is normal under Euclidean geometry (In normal flat space only six triangles, for instance, can share a vertex, but on the Poincaré disk, some are shared by eight triangles, as the total of the angles is now less than 180°). Reverting the triangles back to their normal shape yields various sections of the pseudosphere. The central part yields the familiar saddle shape. A section that leads to the infinite edge, ends up becoming "wrapped" around and joined at its opposite sides, yielding the aforementioned "tractricoid" shape, which is also called a "Gabriel's Horn" (since it resembles a horn with the mouthpiece lying at infinity). Thus the tractricoid is only really a piece of the whole pseudosphere.

Ψευδόσφαιρα:

Οι ιδιότητες αυτού του θεωρητικού μοντέλου μας παρουσιάζουν την ύπαρξη αρνητικού χώρου, δηλαδή μεγέθη με αρνητικό πρόσημο.
Αν υποθέσουμε οτι ο χώρος (διάστημα) όπως τον αντιλαμβανώμαστε είναι επίπεδος τότε σε σημεία που παρουσιάζεται ύλη θεωρητικά μπορούμε να ερευνήσουμε διαφορετικές ιδιότητες ενός "αναδιπλούμενου" χώρου.
Αν επεκτείνουμε αυτή τη συλλογιστική ενα θεωρητικό μοντέλο μη Ευκλείδιας Γεωμετρίας θα μπορούσε να υπολογίσει σε συνθήκες αναδιπλούμενου χώρου.
Οι ιδιότητες αυτού του μοντέλου θα μας επέτρεπαν να υπολογίσουμε συντεταγμένες στο αναδιπλούμενο διάστημα (μη φυσικός χώρος) και να υπολογίσουμε θεωρητικά τη διαδρομή κίνησης ενός αντικειμένου απο το σημείο Αλφα στο σημείο Γάμα χωρίς να περάσει απο το σημείο Βήτα. Θα είναι σαν να διπλώνουμε τον χώρο και να υπολογίζουμε μόνο τα σημεία που εφάπτωνται στην αναδίπλωση για να μετακινηθούμε σε αυτό, δεδομένου οτι έχουμε τεχνολογικά τον τρόπο να το κάνουμε.

Μας λείπει ενα ικανό μαθηματικό μοντέλο και φυσικά η τεχνολογία.


Methods/models of understanding non Euclidean space.

Curvature

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curvature


Curvature refers to a number of loosely related concepts in different areas of geometry. Intuitively, curvature is the amount by which a geometric object deviates from being flat, but this is defined in different ways depending on the context. There is a key distinction between extrinsic curvature which is defined for objects embedded in another space (usually a Euclidean space) in a way that relates to the radius of curvature of circles that touch the object, and intrinsic curvature which is defined at each point in a differential manifold. This article deals primarily with the first concept.

The primordial example of extrinsic curvature is that of a circle which has curvature equal to the inverse of its radius everywhere. Smaller circles bend more sharply, and hence have higher curvature. Further, the curvature of a smooth curve is defined as the curvature of its osculating circle at each point.


Θεωρητικά θα μπορούσε ενα σύστημα καθοδήγησης σε ενα όχημα να εκμεταλευτεί τη καμπύλωση του χώρου γύρω απο μεγάλα βαρυτικά σώματα (όπως πλανήτες) για να αρχίσει να "αντιλαμβάνεται" τη διαδρομή που θα έπρεπε να ακολουθήσει μέσα απο ενα μη Ευκλείδιο χώρο για να ξεπεράσει το φράγμα της ταχύτητας του φωτός και να μεταφερθεί σε μεγάλες αποστάσεις. Στην πραγματικότητα δεν θα έχει ξεπεράσει ποτέ την ταχύτητα του φωτός απλά θα έχει χρησιμοποιήσει ενα τρυκ που του επιτρέπει να ξεκινήσει απο το σημείο Αλφα και παρακάμπτωντας το σημείο Β ( παράκαμψη του ενδιάμεσου Ευκλείδιου χώρου) να βρεθεί στο σημείο Γαμα που θα βρίσκεται έτη φωτός μακριά.

Γιατί να μη μπορούσε ενα σύστημα υπολογισμού συνισταμένων στη μέθοδο του να αρχίσει να υπολογίζει ενα μη Ευκλείδιο άλμα στο χώρο για ενα όχημα, να κατευθύνει ένα σύστημα καθοδήγησης μέσα σε ενα πεδίο Ευκλείδιου χώρου και να ενεργοποιήσει μια μη συμβατική τροχιά ώστε το σύστημα υπολογισμού να αρχίσει να "κατανοεί" τον αναδιπλούμενο χώρο και με το συστημα καθοδήγησης να βρεθούν σε συγχρονισμό ώστε αν το όχημα έχει τη κατάληλη τεχνολογία να καλύψει τελικά μια τεράστια απόσταση σε φαινομενικά ελάχιστο χρόνο.

Το πρόβλημα με το εγχείρημα είναι οτι ο εγκέφαλος μας είναι έτσι σχεδιασμένος ώστε δεν μπορεί να κατανοήσει ιδιότητες του μη Ευκλείδιου χώρου, σε αυτή την πιθανολογούμενη έλειψη ικανότητας στήριξε και τη μυθολογία των διηγημάτων τρόμου ο Χ.Π. Λάβκραφτ. Όπου το ανθρώπινο μυαλό "καταρέει" όταν έρχεται αντιμέτωπο με της ιδιότητες του μη Ευκλείδιου σύμπαντος.

[dhatz]

Κανένα compilation με τα καλύτερα videakia του thread να έχουμε να τα δείχνουμε;

Το πιο κοντινό σ'αυτό που ζητάς video που έχω βρει ετοιμο ως τώρα είναι (βλ. σελίδα που ετοίμασα) το Compilation of UFO Video Footage and Testimony (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-161154636796558877) privately-produced. No speaking, just raw UFO footage and witness testimonies with nice 80's music - Google Video (1hr 35min 329MB)
Στο τελευταίο ημίωρο έχει και τις δηλώσεις αστροναυτών οπως ο Gordon Cooper κι ο Edgar Mitchell, του Admiral Lord Hill-Norton (πρωην Στρατ.Δκτης ΝΑΤΟ), των στρατιωτικών στη βάση Bentwaters/UK απο το περιστατικό του 1980 κλπ

Σημ: Η ποιότητα του video (αναλυση, fps) είναι κάπως φτωχη στο googlevideo, εχω τα ίδια βινετο σε καλύτερη ποιότητα. Ισως κάποια στιγμή, αν βρω χρόνο, να ετοιμάσω μια επιλογή απο το καλύτερο υλικό και να το ανεβάσω στο Ιντερνετ.

Παντως, δεν ξέρω πόσα θα καταλάβει κάποιος που δεν έχει κάποιο γνωστικό υπόβαθρο (και τη δυνατότητα και τη διάθεση να καταλάβει). Εδω στο adslgr που θεωρητικά συχνάζει πιο "σχετικό" κοινό (τεχνολογικής κατευθυνσης κλπ), κι παρότι υπήρχε έτοιμο τοσο υλικό π.χ. του Hil, πάλι είχαμε σχόλια για "κουδούνια προβάτων", "πιάτα", "χύτρες" κλπ

Αν θες να ενημερώσεις φίλους που δεν έχουν ασχοληθεί με το θέμα UFO, θα προτεινα να ξεκινήσεις απο το video "Out of the Blue (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5594744703753734741)"


Χάνεται κανείς στις 30 σελίδες...

Οπου πολλά μηνύματα είναι άσχετα, κατι που συμβαίνει σε όλα τα topics βεβαια... Μια ματιά στο τι γραφτηκε πριν και λιγο googling πριν πατήσουμε το reply δεν βλάπτει...

[dhatz]

Για όσους δεν είδαν το ντοκυμαντέρ με τις μαρτυρίες απο το συμβάν στο δασάκι δίπλα στη βάση με πυρηνικά στο Bentwaters (Αγγλία) τον Δεκ-1980, 21 χρόνια μετά το συμβάν, το 2001 δημοσιεύτηκε στα πλαίσια του Freedom of Informatio Act η γραπτή αναφορά του Υποδιοικητή της αμερικ.βάσης και άλλα σχετικά έγγραφα.

http://www.flyingsaucery.com/Rendlesham/files/doc1.jpg

περιγράφει το αντικείμενο "τριγωνικό, μεταλλικό στην όψη, περίπου 2-3 μέτρα πλάτος και ~2μ ύψος. Φωτισε όλο το δάσος με λευκό φως." Μιλά ακόμα για τα σημάδια στο έδαφος εκει που προσγειώθηκε το UFO και μετρήσεις ραδιενέργειας στο σημείο κλπ Περισσότερες λεπτομέρειες για το περιστατικο που έγινε πριν 25 χρόνια έχουν δημοσιοποιηθεί την τελευταία 5-ετία.

Ομοια πυραμιδο-ειδή UFO με του Rendlesham forest το 1980 περιέγραψαν τα παιδια στο φορουμ astrovox και άλλοι (βλ. προηγούμενα μηνύματα).

[dhatz]

Στο ίδιο θέμα της επίσκεψης UFO στη Βάση με πυρηνικά στο Rendlesham/UK το 1980

Φωτο απο το μπλοκάκι του επόπτη ασφαλείας Jim Penniston, που βγήκε για αναγνώριση στο δασάκι (χωριστά απ'τους άλλους με τον Υποδιοικητη), είδε το προσγειωμένο πυραμιδοειδές UFO, πλησίασε, το άγγιξε και εμοιαζε με μέταλλο αλλά είχε υφη λείου μαύρου γυαλιου και εντονη αίσθηση στατικου ηλεκτρισμού στην ατμόσφαιρα γύρω του

http://www.rendlesham-incident.co.uk/images/plaster_casts_sketches/110000.JPG

και σημείωσε και τα περίεργα "ιερογλυφικά" στην μπροστά αριστερή πλευρά του UFO:
http://www.rendlesham-incident.co.uk/images/plaster_casts_sketches/symbols.JPG

(στο ντοκυμαντέρ διηγήθηκε πως απο σελίδα σε σελίδα το γράψιμο του μπερδεύεται, απο τη σύγχιση και την ταραχή του όταν καταλαβαίνει οτι έχει μπροστά του κάτι εντελώς άγνωστο).

[dhatz]

Μια ενδιαφέρουσα μελέτη του φαινομένου κανουν εδώ και χρόνια στο Hessdalen στη Νορβηγία, με συμμετοχη επιστημόνων απο Νορβηγία, Ιταλία κλπ και με ευρυ φασμα τεχνικου εξοπλισμού (CCD cameras, magnetometers κλπ). Αρχισαν το 1984 με μηδαμινό εξοπλισμό (και υποστήριξη) και έχουν μαζέψει και δημοσιεύσει αρκετό υλικό.


Plans for Project Hessdalen

When these plans can be accomplished is dependend on how much money that will come from sponsors. The main sponsor today has been Østfold University College, in Norway. This amount has not been enough to bring the project up on to a high enough level, to get an answer on the question: "What is this UFO-phenomena".

The plans are:

1. Expand Hessdalen AMS with better and more intruments.
2. Develop and run a database, with a web-interface.
3. Analyse data and start anesessary activities for finding a solution on the UFO-phenomena.
4. Develop small automatic stations, that can be installed on other places with high "UFO-activity".
5. Establish connections with other databases with proper information.
6. Assist "Norwegian UFO Centre Ltd." with technical and theoretical support


Αντιστοιχη δουλεια απο αναλογο γκρουπ ξέρω ότι γίνεται και στον Καναδά. Αλλά δεν έχω προλάβει ακόμα να διαβάσω το υλικό τους ωστε να μπορώ να σχολιάσω.

Αυτα τα γράφω επειδή μπορεί να υπάρχουν αντίστοιχες επαναλαμβανόμενες θεάσεις UFO/UAL κάπου στην Ελλάδα και να ενδιαφερθεί κάποιο Πανεπιστήμιο να στήσει κάτι ανάλογο.

http://www.hessdalen.org/reports/
http://www.hessdalen.org/station/

http://www.hessdalen.org/pict/station/H-AMS-sys3-middle.gif

[MNP-10]

Μια πολυ συχνη θεαση που μ'ειχε προβληματισει (μπορει να το εχετε πετυχει και εσεις.. εγω το εχω δει >10 φορες στον Αττικο ουρανο) ηταν κατι σαν αστρο, χωρις ηχο, σε μεγαλο υψος, με σταθερο (και οχι blinking φωτισμο) που κλιμακωνε την ενταση του φωτος σε πολυ φωτεινο επιπεδο ενω στη συνεχεια ξανασκοτεινιαζε... κινουμενο παντα σε σταθερη ισια τροχια και με μεγαλη ταχυτητα. Τα χαρακτηριστικα δεν ταιριαζαν σε καποιο αεροσκαφος.. Σαν εναπομεινοντα σεναρια εξηγησης ειχα

1) ΑΤΙΑ
2) Καποιο πανελ δορυφορου που αντικατοπτριζει τον ηλιο / space junk / διαστημικος σταθμος κτλ..

Τελικα βρηκα αργοτερα οτι ειναι οι Iridium satellites... και το φαινομενο τους λεγεται "satellite flare".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridium_(satellite)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridium_flare

Λογικα πρεπει να ειναι αρκετα κοινη θεαση, οποτε το παραθετω για να γνωριζει ο κοσμος οτι αυτο, αν και τηρει αρκετες προϋποθεσεις σαν ΑΤΙΑ, ειναι τελικα γνωριμης ταυτοτητας γηινη κατασκευη. Και μαλιστα αρκετα εντυπωσιακη, οπως φαινεται απο κατω, καποιες φορες.

[dhatz]

Θα μ'ενδιέφερε πολύ παντως ν'ακούσω ιστορίες για θεάσεις UFO (ή και CE3 δηλαδή θέαση UFO-ναυτών!) απο μέλη του adslgr, ειδικά σε κοντινή απόσταση λίγων μέτρων, όπου οι πιθανότητες παρανόησης είναι μικρές (σαν αυτές των δυο παιδιών στο φορουμ του astrovox).

Εχω βρεί διάφορα στο Ελληνοφωνο Ιντερνετ, τα οποία θα σταδιακά μεταφέρω εδώ προς ενημέρωση και συζήτηση.

Τελος, στην ακόλουθη δημοσίευση ο Ιταλός αστροφυσικός Teodorani (που ειναι στην επιστημονική ομάδα του Hessdalen) μιλα και για την πιθανή σύνδεση του φαινομένου UFO με "εξωγήινες επισκέψεις" (Extra Terrestrial Visitation)


THE PHYSICAL STUDY OF ATMOSPHERIC LUMINOUS ANOMALIES AND THE SETV HYPOTHESIS
Massimo Teodorani, Ph.D. ASTROPHYSICIST
CNR - Istituto di Radioastronomia / Radiotelescopi di Medicina
Via Gobetti 101 - 40129 Bologna (Italia) / E-mail : mteo@linenet.it

ABSTRACT. On the basis of statistical calculations on galactic migration which bring the necessity of insertion of a new parameter inside the Drake formula, the work-hypothesis named SETV predicts that exogenous vehicles and/or probes may have reached the Solar System too, including Earth. The technology which is now available is able to allow sensing operations both in the extreme borders of the solar system and on our own planet. The possible presence of probes of possible extraterrestrial origin on our planet may be ascertained by using a network of sensing stations which are placed in critical areas. One of them is the norwegian area of Hessdalen, where the two scientific explorative missions of “Project EMBLA” have carried out measurements which demonstrate the existence of all the anomalies of the luminous phenomenon which is present there. At present nothing proves scientifically that our planet is being visited by alien intelligences, nevertheless the remarkable peculiarity which was learnt in some areas of recurrence demonstrate that the verified phenomenology, of extreme importance for fundamental physics, presents characteristics which deserve a further investigation with highly sophisticated instrumentation.

Το πληρες αρθρο http://www.zeitlin.net/OpenSETI/Docs/EuroSETI2002_OSI.htm

[dhatz]

2) Καποιο πανελ δορυφορου που αντικατοπτριζει τον ηλιο / space junk / διαστημικος σταθμος κτλ..



Για δορυφόρους δες και το

http://science.nasa.gov/Realtime/JTrack/3D/JTrack3D.html

Java app 3D map με 900+ δορυφόρους ζουμάρεις, το περιστρέφεις κλπ. Και κάνει update real-time

[dhatz]

Επισης άπαιχτο είναι το

http://aladin.u-strasbg.fr/java/nph-aladin.pl?-rm=14.1&-server=Aladin

http://aladin.u-strasbg.fr/aladinjavalogo.gif

Aladin is an interactive software sky atlas allowing the user to visualize digitized images of any part of the sky, to superimpose entries from astronomical catalogs or personal user data files, and to interactively access related data and information from the SIMBAD, NED, VizieR, or other archives for all known objects in the field (see available data). Aladin is particularly useful for multi-spectral cross-identifications of astronomical sources, observation preparation and quality control of new data sets.

[dhatz]

Για να είμαστε ακριβοδίκαιοι στο topic, θα πρέπει να αναφερθούμε και στην "αλλη αποψη", στους σκεπτικιστές και στους "debunkers" (αυτούς που αρνούνται την ύπαρξη UFO, και που αποκαλώ "οπαδούς της Επίπεδης Γης") και τα επιχειρήματά τους.

Οπως προανέφερα, στις μέρες μας οι UFO-σκεπτικιστές είναι στην πλειοψηφία τους διάφοροι φιλόλογοι, φιλόσοφοι, ψυχολόγοι κλπ "social scientists", οι οποίοι μη έχοντας ασχοληθεί ΣΤΟΙΧΕΙΩΔΩΣ με (είτε μη έχοντας το γνωστικό υπόβαθρο να κατανοήσουν) την ουσία, το αντιμετωπίζουν σαν "psychological aberration":

"δεν είδες αυτό που είδες, ήταν της φαντασίας σου"
"το μυαλό του ανθρώπου παίζει περίεργα παιχνίδια" (και οι φωτ.μηχανές? ;) )
"mass hallucination" κλπ

κι στους UFO-σκεπτικιστές βρίσκονται και κάποιοι αστρονόμοι και με τα επιχειρήματά τους θα ασχοληθώ στη συνέχεια.

[dhatz]

Ισως ο πιο επιφανής "UFO debunker" στην ιστορία ήταν ο αστρονόμος του Harvard, Donal Menzel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Menzel) ο οποίος ισχυριζόταν ότι όλες οι θεάσεις είναι στην πραγματικότητα παρανοήσεις, οφθαλμαπάτες κλπ (όσους μάρτυρες δεν έβρισκε πιο ευκολο να τους βγάλει τρελλους ή απατεώνες).

Αντιγράφω απο την τοποθέτησή του στο θέμα των UFO προς την Επιτροπή Διαστημικής και Επιστημών του Αμερικ. Κογκρέσσου το 1968:



Reflections from power lines, insulators, television antennas, radars, radio telescopes, even apartment windows! These, too, have produced realistic UFO's.

I could add to this list almost indefinitely. But the chief point I want to make is that simple phenomena like the above have tricked intelligent people into reporting a UFO.

But there are a few other phenomena that can produce UFO's of a type that, as far as I know, the Air Force still does not recognize.

I quote from an article on "Vision" in Volume 14 of the McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science and Technology. "... any observant person can detect swirling clouds or spots of 'light' in total darkness or while looking at a homogeneous field such as a bright blue sky." If you want to see flying saucers just look up. If you don't see them, you probably are not "observant."

I see them most clearly in a dark room or on a moonless night with the sky even darker with heavy clouds. I find stars somewhat distracting. Just lie down on your back, open your eyes and see the saucers spin. The show is free. You will almost surely see bright, irregular patches of light form. Most of them seem grey green, but I occasionally see silver or gold and occasionally red. I can imagine windows in some of them. As you move your eyes they will cavort over the sky. To speed up the action just rub your eyes like a person coming out of a sleep. Occasionally the whole field becomes large and luminous. Now, I ask you, how canyon be sure that the UFO reported by an airline pilot is not one of these spurious images? And even if an alerted co-pilot confirms it, he might also be responding to a similar effect in his own eyes![/B]

The chemistry and physiology of the human eyes are certainly responsible for many UFO sightings. The eye responds in different ways to different kinds of stimuli. A sudden burst of bright light, like that from a flash bulb, for example, exerts an enduring effect on the eye. The light from the flash produces an immediate change in the so-called visual purple of the retina. In a sense the retinal spot on which the image fell becomes fatigued. For some minutes after the flash you will be able to see a bright, usually greenish, floating spot, which could be mistaken for a UFO by someone unfamiliar with the problem.

Let me take an actual case, which is typical of a large number actually in the files of Project Bluebook. A child, going to the bathroom turns on a bright light and accidentally awakens one of his parents who is blinded by the sudden illumination. The light goes off and the parent gets up to investigate and just happens to glance out of the window. He is startled to see a peculiar spot of light floating over the trees and making irregular, jerky motions. He watches the UFO for a minute or two until it finally disappears.

He cannot be blamed for failing to realize that the erratic and often rapid movements of his UFO are those of the after-image, drifting with the similar movements of his own eye. The UFO appears in the direction he happens to be looking. That is all. And yet he may describe it graphically as a luminous object "cavorting around in the sky."

Many such stimuli are possible by day or night. Some time ago I was driving directly toward the setting sun. When I came to a stop-light and looked out the side window of the car, I was startled to see a large, black object shaped something like a dirigible, surrounded by dozens of small black balloons. I suddenly realized that they were after-images of the sun. The big one was where I had been looking most fixedly. The spots were images where my eye had wandered. A UFO buff could have sworn that he was seeing a "mother ship" and a swarm of UFO's in rapid flight,

I once had another similar experience. I suddenly glanced up and was surprised to see a whole flotilla of UFO's flying in formation across the blue sky. They looked like after-images, but I hadn't been conscious of the visual stimulus responsible. I quickly retraced my steps and found it: sunlight reflected from the shiny surf ace of the fender of a parked car.
http://new-ncas.org/ufosymposium/menzel.html


Να σημειώσω ότι το link είναι απο τη βιβλιοθήκη του NCAS "National Capital Area SKEPTICS".

O επιφανής αυτος αστρονόμος - επιστήμονας, του οποίου τα συμπεράσματα για θεάσεις UFO δημοσίευαν τα ΜΜΕ της εποχής περιγράφει πιο πάνω ότι π.χ. οι πιλότοι και άλλοι μάρτυρες πιθανόν να ξεγελιούνται απο το "after image" - όταν κοιταξουμε τον ήλιο, μετά μένει μια σκιά για κάποια δευτερόλεπτα- και το αναφέρουν σαν UFO.

Συνεχίζει...


After-images possess still other complicated characteristics. A colored light tends to produce an after-image with complementary color. A green flash will cause a red after-image and vice versa. Color-blind persons and persons with defective vision will often experience effects different from those of people with normal eyesight.

Another optical phenomenon that can produce an illusion of flying objects lies within the eye itself. Again, look at some uniformly bright surface -- sky or ceiling. Relax your eyes. By that I mean focus your eyes on infinity. The changes are that you will see an array of dark spots. These specks, which may seem to be near like a swarm of gnats or as ill-defined objects at a distance, are either on or in your eye. They may be dust floating on the lens, minute imperfections in the cornea, or possibly blood cells on the retina. These, too, can simulate evasive and erratic movement

The eyeball jumps a little every time you blink. Walking transmits vibrations to the eye at every step. Many individuals think they see stars, planets, or satellites oscillating when the movement is actually that of the eye itself. Here is an example.

Συνεχίζει πως άλλα UFO μπορεί να είναι σκουπιδάκια στο φακό του ματιού ή ερυθρά αιμοσφαίρια στον αμφιβληστροειδή...

κ.ο.κ. αν ενδιαφέρεστε διαβάστε όλη την τοποθέτηση του (προς εκπροσώπους του Κογκρέσου σε συνέδριο για τα UFO!) στο http://new-ncas.org/ufosymposium/menzel.html

Κι με τέτοια επιχειρήματα, ο Menzel υπήρξε ο #1 επώνυμος επιστήμονας (PhD αστρονόμος, Διευθυντής του Αστεροσκοπείου στο Χάρβαρντ) debunker/σκεπτικιστής επί σχεδόν 3 δεκαετίες. Οπως ειδαμε και στο CONDIGN Report, τα ΜΜΕ σχεδόν ποτέ δεν μπαινουν στις λεπτομερειες και στην ουσία, απλά βγάζουν έναν τίτλο στο θέμα, βασει δηλώσεων κάποιου σαν τον Menzel που μπορουν να τον επικαλεστούν ως αυθεντία.

ΥΓ: Η ολη ιστορία μπορεί ομως να είναι αρκετά πιο σύνθετη. Π.χ. ΑΝ τα βασικά ντοκουμέντα MAJ12 είναι αυθεντικά, και νομιζω πως είναι, τότε ο Menzel ως μέλος του κλειστού αυτού γκρουπ, είχε το ρόλο του οργανου παραπληροφόρησης του κοινου σχετικά με την πραγματικότητα των UFO. Θεωρώντας πιθανον οτι υπηρετεί εναν υψηλότερο σκοπό "τους λέω ψέμματα, για το καλό τους".

[dhatz]

Ενα παράδειγμα του πως ο επιφανής επιστήμονας, καθηγητής αστρονόμος του Χάρβαρντ Menzel εξηγούσε περιστατικά UFO, με το περιστατικό θεασης UFO το 1959 απο τον ιεραπόστολο Πατέρα Gill στη Νεα Γουινέα και 24 άλλα άτομα που συνυπέγραψαν μαζί του την σχετική μαρτυρία:

Χωρίς να επικοινωνήσει ΠΟΤΕ με κανέναν απο τους μάρτυρες, ο καθηγητής Menzel "εξήγησε" το περιστατικό κανοντας την ΕΙΚΑΣΙΑ ότι ο πατέρας Gill ήταν μύωπας και δεν φορούσε τα γιαλιά του, κι επιπλέον είχε και αστιγματισμό, και ότι την κίνηση του UFO και των UFO-ναυτών που ανέφερε ήταν στην πραγματικότητα σκόνη και υγρασια στις βλεφαρίδες (!!!) του.

Και ότι οι υπόλοιποι 24 μάρτυρες στο περιστατικό τον έβλεπαν σαν θεό και ως αγράμματοι ιθαγενείς ακολουθησαν τον αρχηγό τους.

Για συντομία αντιγράφω απο post του Jerome Clark (που έγραψε μια απο τις μεγαλύτερες εγκυκλοπαίδειες με περιστατικά UFO) μαζί με τα σχόλια του:

As it happens, I spent several hours one day with Father Gill,
whom I met in Evanston, Illinois, in 1977. I wanted to ask him,
among other things, about the supposed solutions to his sighting
conjured up by Menzel and Philip J. Klass (who, in
characteristic debunker fashion, had put forth different,
mutually exclusive explanations). Gill turned out to be a
bright, sensible, impressive man, the very opposite of the
foolish character that debunkers - who had, of course, never met
him or even interviewed him by phone or mail - had depicted. He
seemed more puzzled than annoyed at what the pelicanists had
written about him. (Bill Chalker, who knows Father Gill far
better than I, will verify what I have said here.)

The rest of you, promise you won't laugh now, but here's what
Menzel proposed as a solution to the sighting Gill and more than
30 other witnesses reported experiencing:

In Menzel's view (which can fairly be termed racist), the only
witness who mattered was Gill, because the others were
impressionalbe natives who didn't understand English very well
and who would agree to anything "their great white leader"
(Menzel's actual phrase, believe it or not) said, to the extent
that they would even sign a statement attesting to a sighting of
a UFO with occupants. Menzel added that their English illiteracy
made it, moreover, unlikely that they knew what they were
signing.

Menzel went on to claim, with zero supporting evidence, that
Menzel saw Venus but was suffering from astigmatism. In a final
flourish, he added, "The slight irregularities on the 'hairs' of
the lashes, perhaps dust or moisture, could easily be
interpreted as activity of the 'beings' inhabiting the saucer."
How did Menzel know Gill had seen Venus, not a UFO? Because of,
according to Menzel, Gill's failure to mention seeing Venus. In
reality, Gill had stated plainly, "I saw Venus, but I also saw
this sparkling object [the large UFO] ... above Venus."

Beyond that, Gill offered these observations:

"That 'great white leader' business might happen in Hollywood
movies about African missionaries, but certainly not where I
was. I was sent to Boianai [in Papua New Guinea - no comma, by
the way, between Papua and New Guinea, as most accounts
erroneously have it] to sort things out because there were
certain problems caused by a growing anti- European feeling.
They didn't want a European there at all because I was a
stranger to the district..... We had some real difficulties.....
The people at Boianai were fairly well educated, and in fact
some of them went on to assume leadership positions in the
surrounding communities. I should emphasize that their education
was in English. From grade three onwards they're doing all their
schoolwork in English. These people are quite gifted
linguists..... So there is no basis to Menzel's charge that they
had no idea what they were signing..... If we were making some
up that wasn't true or if I had been hallucinating something the
others weren't seeing, I'm quite certain that within a week - at
the outside - I would have been exposed because the members of
the anti- European faction were looking hard for a chance to
show up the 'great white leader.'"
http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2001/jun/m08-006.shtml

[dhatz]

Μια παρενθεση (θα επανέλθω στους ψευδο-σκεπτικιστές οπαδούς της Επίπεδης Γης αργότερα), με μια θεωρία σχετικά με το γιατί δεν έχουν πραγματοποιήσει το ultimate contant δηλ. να εμφανιστούν δημόσια με τρόπο που μην επιδέχεται αμφισβήτησης (το κλασσικό "land on White House lawn" σενάριο).

Οτι πρόκειται για μια διαδικασία σταδιακής "εξοικείωσης" με την πραγματικότητα της εξωγήινης παρουσίας, με τρόπο όμως που δεν θα είναι δραματικά ανατρεπτικός για τις τρέχουσες δομές (κοινωνικές, θρησκευτικές, οικονομικές κλπ).

Κάτι σαν το 1st directive του Star Trek δηλαδή.


UFO sightings merit more attention, scientist says

6-24-97
By David Stauth, 541-737-0787
SOURCE: James Deardorff, 541-757-8905

CORVALLIS, Ore. - An increasing number of highly-credible UFO sightings are being made around the world, one scientist says, though much of it goes unrecognized by the general public due to disdain by scientists, the military, political leaders and the news media.

What's underway may be a carefully orchestrated plan by extraterrestrial beings who know they must gradually prepare a backwards culture - humans - for news of their presence while providing "deniability" to those who can't yet handle that fact, said Jim Deardorff, a professor emeritus of atmospheric sciences at Oregon State University.

Deardorff spoke today at a meeting of the Pacific Division of the American Association of the Advancement of Science, reviewing studies done in this area, including his own, about the possibility of an alien presence.

The 50th anniversary is nearing of the famous "alien spaceship" controversy in Roswell, N.M. The city of Phoenix, Ariz. is buzzing about a mile-wide UFO that thousands of people reportedly saw last March, and other claims of ET sightings continue to stream in.

It's time to take a fresh look at a taboo topic, Deardorff said.

"Personally I'm convinced that an extraterrestrial presence here on Earth is a fact, not a theory," Deardorff said. "It's time for the government, the science community, the news media and others in a position of power to stop ignoring these issues as if they were hogwash, and do some real studies."

But in all likelihood the public will have to provide its own leadership in investigating this phenomenon, he said, because people in positions of authority feel most threatened by powers that clearly transcend their own.

"And another point we have to face, which most people don't realize, is that we are not the ones who are in charge," Deardorff said. "Aliens with the technology to come here, conceal their presence and be seen only when they choose are clearly the ones in control. They are implementing a strategy."

Since retiring from OSU in 1986 as a recognized expert in atmospheric science, Deardorff has spent years reviewing volumes of evidence about an extraterrestrial presence and developing theories about their behavior.

The topic is now hotter than ever, he said, as evidence of new planets and the possibility of life elsewhere continues to mount.

An assumption generally made, he said, is that aliens millions of years more advanced than humans can travel through space with technology beyond our comprehension. But a leading question, he says, is if extraterrestrials have already come to Earth, why don't they make themselves known?

Many theories have been hypothesized to explain this, he said, which variably describe aliens viewing humans as a zoo, nursery, laboratory or in a state of quarantine or embargo - by this reasoning, if we're so barbaric we can't get along with each other, how could we possibly get along with them?

Deardorff's own contribution is what he calls the "leaky embargo" hypothesis, which argues that the aliens in charge are more ethical than we and wish to let us know of their existence and presence, but not too suddenly lest it threaten the governmental, financial, cultural and religious foundations on which we depend.

"If in fact extraterrestrials are using this strategy, they reveal themselves to enough people, over a period of time, that the idea of their existence becomes accepted by those people whose belief system can handle it," he said. "But they keep the contacts remote and infrequent enough that people who need to deny their existence can still do that if they have to."

"It's a little bit like the 'prime directive' of Star Trek fame that forbids interference with other civilizations," he said.

Reputable scientific research on UFOs is still rare, Deardorff said, largely because government and scientific leaders fear ridicule and criticism, or are reluctant to admit the existence of scientific knowledge greatly beyond that of present-day humans.

"Meanwhile, studies show that roughly half of the people in the U.S. believe UFOs are real objects and not just someone's imagination," Deardorff said. "And some 70 percent believe there is life elsewhere in the universe."

Thousands of UFO sightings each year pass screening by groups who attempt to rule out hoaxes and natural phenomena, Deardorff said. And just recently, some of the most profound sightings in years have taken place.

In a case in South Africa investigated by a professor from Harvard University, actual alien beings were witnessed. And the recent case in Phoenix triggered hundreds of reports from people who described a huge V-shape in the sky which variably hovered, cruised slowly, was silent and had large lights.

Airline pilots, businessmen, truck drivers and engineers saw it, and many videos were made.

Back to OSU News
Last Update:Monday, 23-Jun-1997 16:17:00 PDT
http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ncs/newsarch/1997/June97/ufos.htm

[dhatz]

Το θέμα των πηγών και της ακρίβειας της πληροφορίας είναι σημαντικό, γιατί οπως δυστυχώς και σε όλα τα άλλα θέματα, υπάρχει ένα ΑΠΙΣΤΕΥΤΟ "σπασμένο τηλέφωνο" που αλλοιώνει την πληροφορία: αλλα χανονται για οικονομία χώρου στην περίληψη, αλλα χανονται στη μετάφραση, αλλα λογω παντελους αγνοιας του συντάκτη είτε και ηθελημένης παραπληροφόρησης απο κάποιον που θέλει να στηρίξει συγκεκριμένες θέσεις (θρησκόληπτοι, αρχαιολάτρες, βΛιακοπουλικοί, Ομάδες "Ε" κλπ) διαστρέφοντας τα στοιχεία.

Γιαυτό προσπαθησα ως τώρα όσο γίνεται να παραθέτω ΠΡΩΤΟΓΕΝΕΙΣ πηγές πληροφορόρησης και το πλήρες ORIGINAL υλικό.

Στο http://clubs.pathfinder.gr/X_FILES/77311 (οπου δυστυχώς σχεδόν όλο το υπόλοιπο υλικό τους είναι αναξιόπιστο) υπάρχει μια συνέντευξη του Ελληνα Φυσικού Παύλου Σαντορίνη σχετικά με το θέμα UFO.

Με όλο αυτό το μπάχαλο δεν ήμουν καν σίγουρος οτι ο Π.Σαντορίνης ήταν υπαρκτό πρόσωπο, αλλα αναφέρεται στη σελίδα http://deansos.uoa.gr/gr/anakinosis/laskaridis.htm "Η σύγχρονη ιστορία του Τμήματος Φυσικής" του Παν.Αθηνών και το κυριως κειμενο της συνέντευξης δείχνει ότι πιθανόν να είναι αυθεντική.

Ο Παύλος Σαντορίνης, γεννήθηκε το 1893 στην Οδησσό της Ρωσίας και απεβίωσε το 1986 στην Αθήνα. Συνέντευξη τον Φεβρουάριο του 1966, στον Κωστή Μεραναίο, της κρατικής ραδιοφωνίας.

Συνεντευξη:
ΜΕΡΑΝΑΙΟΣ :
Είναι γνωστή η προσωπικότης του καθηγητού κ. Παύλου Σαντορίνη.
Χάρις σ' αυτόν η ελληνική επιστήμη έχει τα πρωτεία της εις την διεθνή άμιλλαν της ερεύνης.
Τελευταίως ακόμη η εκλογή του ως fellow της Ακαδημίας Επιστημών της Ν. Υόρκης, αποτελεί μίαν άλλην αναγνώρισιν του διεθνούς κύρους του. Ο καθηγητής κ. Σαντορίνης εκτός της εφευρέσεώς του, του Εκατοστομετρικού Ραντάρ (1936-1940), του Ραδιοπυροσωλήνος, (του μυστικού όπλου των ΗΠΑ), του Ηλεκτρονικού Εγκεφάλου Η, της συμβολής του εις την μελέτην των βασικών ηλεκτρονικών φαινομένων κ.λπ. δίδει συνεχώς το παρόν εις τον διεθνή επιστημονικόν κόσμον.
Διά το θέμα των Ιπτάμενων Δίσκων έχουν διατυπωθεί πολλαί απόψεις.
Η πρώτη όμως, αυστηρώς επιστημονική θέσις, αντιμετώπισις και εξήγησις του φαινομένου μας δίδεται σήμερα από τον καθηγητήν κ. Παύλον Σαντορίνην, τον οποίον θα έχωμεν την ευκαιρίαν να ακούσωμεν αμέσως.
ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ :
Μέχρι τo 1954 ο Ιπτάμενος Δίσκος ήτο εν μεμονωμένον φαινόμενον. Από καιρού εις καιρόν ενεφανίζετο εις τον ουρανών εν αντικείμενον, το οποίον δεν έμοιαζε προς κάτι το γνωστόν, εξετελέσει σειράν καταπληκτικώς απότομων κινήσεων και κατόπιν εξηφανίζετο.
'Ηδη εκ των πρώτων εμφανίσεων των αντικειμένων αυτών, ετέθη το ερώτημα περί της φύσεως και προελεύσεώς των, επειδή το καθ' εαυτό γεγονός της υπάρξεώς των ουδόλως ήτο δυνατόν ν' αμφισβητηθή.
ΜΕΡΑΝΑΙΟΣ :
Και ποια είναι η εξήγησις που μπορεί να δοθή στα φαινόμενα αυτά ;
ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ :
Oι εξηγήσεις είναι αι εξής τρεις :
Κατά την μεν πρώτην, επρόκειτο περί εντυπωσιακών επιδείξεων μιας αγνώστου Μεγάλης Δυνάμεως, η οποία επεχείρει, δια των εμφανίσεων αυτών, να επηρεάση υπέρ αυτής, την κοινήν γνώμην των άλλων Κρατών.
Ομολογώ ότι ήμην εξ αρχrjς οπαδός της εξηγήσεως αυτής, καίτοι ήτο δύσκολον ν' αντιληφθή κανείς δια ποίον λόγον η υπ' όψιν Μεγάλη Δύναμις, εκρύπτετο, όπισθεν ανωνυμίας, ενώ ο προορισμός των επιδείξεων αυτών θα ήτο ακριβώς η εμφάνισις της τελειότητος των υπ' αυτής κατασκευα-ζομένων πυραύλων.
Κατά την δευτέραν εξήγησιν, ότι επρόκειτο περί φαινο-μένων δια τα οποία υπάρχουν αληθοφανείς ερμηνείαι ως π.χ. εμφάνισις μετεωριτών ή άλλων φυσικών φαινομένων. Εν τούτοις, υπάρχουν και σήμερον ακόμη, εκατοντcίδες επισήμων παρατηρήσεων Ιπταμένων Δίσκων, αι οποίαι δεν ηδυνήθησαν να εξηγηθούν ως φυσικά φαινόμενα.
Κατά την τρίτην εξήγησιν, ότι πρόκειται περί της επισκέψεως κατοίκων ενός άλλου Πλανήτου.
Η εξήγησις αυτή εφαίνετο αρχικώς τόσον γελοία, ώστε ουδείς άνθρωπος σεβόμενος εαυτόν, ηδύνατο να δώση πίστιν εις μίαν, εκ πρώτης όψεως, τόσον εξωφρενικήν ερμηνείαν των παρατηρηθέντων μυστηριωδών φαινομένων.
Οπότε, συνέβη κάτι το καταπληκτικόν.
Kατά τας ημέρας 24, 26, 27, 29 Σεπτεμβρίου, 2, 3, 7, 11, 12, 14 και 15 Οκτωβρίου, 1954, εσημειώθη ομαδική εμφάνισις των μυστηριωδών αυτών αντικειμένων, τα οποία παρετηρήθησαν εις διάφορα σημεία της Γαλλίας, εθεάθησαν υπό διαφόρων, αγνώστων μεταξύ των ανθρώπων, εκ δε της συστηματικής παραβολής των παρατηρήσεων αυτών, εξήχθη, καθαρώς επιστημονικώς, το συμπέρασμα, ότι επρόκειτο περί των αυτών αντικειμένων, τα οποία εγένοντο ορατά εις διάφορα σημεία της Ευρώπης και της Αμερικής.
Εκ της παραβολής των εκάστοτε ωρών εμφανίσεως των αντικειμένων τούτων, υπελογίσθη η ταχύτης αυτών, η οποία υπερέβαινε, κατά πολύ την ταχύτητα των σημερινών αεροπλάνων.
ΜΕΡΑΝΑΙΟΣ :
Έγιναν απόπειραι να πλησιασθούν τα μυστηριώδη αυτά αντικείμενα ;
ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ :
Πολλαί απόπειραι Αμερικανών και άλλcυν αεροπόρων να πλησιάσουν τα μυστηριώδη αυτά αντικείμενα διά να τα εξαναγκάσουν εις προσγείωσιν, είχον ως αποτέλεσμα την κατάρριψιν αυτών εκ μεγcιλου ύψους, τα δε συντρίμματα των αεροσκαφών και τα διαμελισμένα πτώματα των πιλοτών, εξέπεμπον ισχυράν ραδιενεργόν ακτινοβολίαν, τελείως αγνώστου προελεύσεως.
1)
Αναφέρω ως πρώτον κλασσικόν παράδειγμα την επί-θεσιν ενός Αμερικανικού αεροπλάνου εναντίον ενός Ιπταμένου Δίσκου.
Την 7ην Ιανουαρίου 1948, η στρατιωτική αστυνομία του φρουρίου Κnοx όπου το γνωστόν Θησαυροφυλάκιον των Αμερικανών, επεσήμανε προς το αεροδρόμιο Godman εν πελώριον αντικείμενον ιπτάμενον προς την διεύθυνσίν του.
Μισή ώρα αργότερα το αντικείμενον τούτο έφθασεν υπεράνω του αεροδρομίου και ανυψώθη κατακορύφως προς τα άνω.
Ο συνταγματάρχης Hix και ο ταγματcιρχης Woods το παρετήρησαν ενώ ο λοχαγός Mantell οδηγών το σκάφος Ρ.51 αρχίζει τη καταδίωξίν του, συνοδευόμενος από δύο άλλα καταδιωκτικά αεροπλάνα. Επέτυχε να το πλησιάση και ν' αναγγείλη διά του ασυρμάτου ότι το «αντικείμενον είναι μεταλλικόν και πελωρίων διαστάσεων».
Το τελευταίον του μήνυμα ήτο το εξής:
«Βρίσκεται πάντοτε υπεράνω εμού, κινούμενον με την αυτήν ή μεγαλυτέραν ταχύτητα.
Ανέρχομαι εις 7000 μέτρα.
Εάν δεν δυνηθώ να το πλησιάσω, θα εγκαταλείψω την καταδίωξιν».
Τα συντρίμματα του αεροπλάνου ευρέθησαν επί του εδάφους.
Ενεφάνιζον δε μυστηριώδεις ραβδώσεις αι οποίαι Θυμίζουν τας προκαλούμενας ενίοτε υπό των κεραυνών.
2)
Ως δεύτερον παράδειγμα αναφέρω μίαν περίπτωσιν επιθέσεως ενός Ιπτάμενου Δίσκου εναντίον ενός αεροπλάνου.
Το DC3 (Ντακότα) εκτελούν την συγκοινωνίαν μεταξύ Ατλάντας και Βοστόνης απεγειώθη από το Χιούστον την 23ην Ιουλίου 1948 και ώραν 20.30.
Κυβερνήτης του σκάφους ήτο ο Κλάρενς Chiles, έχων στο ενεργητικόν του 8.500 ώρας πτήσεως, συνταγματάρχης του Air-Trans-port Command.
Εις τας 20.45 είδος τορπίλλης άνευ πτερών, επετέθη εναντίον του.
Δι' ενός απότομου ελιγμού την απέφυγεν ενώ αυτή ανήλθε με ιλιγγιώδη ταχύτητα.
Ολόκληρων το πλήρωμα διέκρινε επί του αντικειμένου τούτου διπλήν σειράν παραθύρων.
3)
Τρίτον κλασσικόν παράδειγμα :
η υπόθεσης Γκόρ-νταμαν.
Την 1ην Οκτωβρίου 1948 περί ώραν 21ην, ο υπολοχαγός Γκόρντμαν επρόκειτο να προσγειωθrj με το αεροπλάνον του Ρ.51 εις το αεροδρόμιον Φάργκο των ΗΠΑ οπότε αντελήφθη εν φωτεινόν ιπτάμενον αντικείμενον εις ύψος 350 μέτρων άνωθεν αυτού.
Ο Γκόρντμαν επετέθη εναντίον του αντικειμένου τούτου και η μάχη συνεχίσθη μέχρι ύψους 5000 μέτρων οπότε διεπιστώθη οτι οι ελιγμοί του εξετελούντο με απόλυτον λογικότητα.
Μετά παρεύλεσιν είκοσι λεπτών το αντικείμενον τούτο απεμακρύνθη με ιλιγγιώδη ταχύτητα.
Μετά την προσγείωσίν του το Ρ.51 υπεβλήθη εις ανάλυσιν με μετρητήν Γκάϊγκερ με θετικά αποτελέσματα.
Έως το 1952 οι Αμερικανοί συνέλεξαν αρκετάς χιλιάδας παρατηρήσεις πλείσται των οποίων αναφέρονται εις την έκθεσιν του λοχαγού Ruppelt.
Σημειωτέον ότι εις άνω των εξακοσίων περιπτώσεων δεν ηδυνήθη να δοθή μια φυσική ερμηνεία των υπ' όψιν εμφανίσεων.

ΜΕΡΑΝΑΙΟΣ :
Υπήρξαν ανάλογα περιστατικά ;
ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ :
Ο Γάλλος Aime Michel υπεβλήθη εις τον κόπον να συλλέξη και να επισημάνη επί ενός χάρτου της Γαλλίας τας χιλιάδας παρατηρήσεων επί των Ιπταμένων Δίσκων της περιόδου μεταξύ της 24ης Σεπτεμβρίου και της 15ης Οκτωβρίου 1954.
Τούτο του επέτρεψε ν' ανακαλύψη το υπ' αυτού ονομασθέν φαινόμενον της Ορθοτενίας.
Δηλαδrj της συστηματικrjς κατανομής των εμφανίσεων Ιπταμένων Δίσκων άνωθεν της Γαλλίας ωσάν τα αντικείμενα αυτά να εκτελούσαν μίαν συστηματικήν επιστημονικήν εξερεύνησιν επί του Γαλλικού εδcιφους.
Επί πλέον, ακριβώς τα αυστηρώς γεωμετρικά σχrjματα των εν λόγω τροχιών αποκλείουν σχεδόν μετά βεβαιότητος πάσαν ερμηνείαν περί της τυχαίας δήθεν εμφανίσεως των μυστηριωδών αντικειμένων αυτών, υπεράνω του εδάφους της Γαλλίας.
Ο Michel συνεκέντρωσε τα πορίσματα αρκετών χιλιάδων τοιούτων παρατηρήσεων εις το σύγγραμμά του «Μυστηριώδη Ουράνια Αντικείμενα» (Παρίσι 1958).
Διευκρινίζω ότι τα στοιχεία τα οποία αναφέρω βασίζονται εξ ολοκλήρου εις το σύγγραμμα του Michel, ως την σήμερον πληρεστέραν πηγήν επί του θέματος των Ιπταμένων Δίσκων.
Εφ' όσον πολλαί εμφανίσεις Ιπταμένων Δίσκων δεν ηδυνήθησαν να εξηγηθούν ως φυσικά φαινόμενα και εφ' όσον αποκλείεται εκ των πραγμάτων η κατασκευή των Ιπταμένων Δίσκων τούτων υπό του Ανθρώπου, η μόνη απομένουσα εξήγησις της εμφανίσεώς των επί της Γης, είναι κατά τον Aime Michel η έξωθεν του Πλανήτου μας προέλευσις αυτών.
Όλοι ενθυμούμεθα την περυσινήν είδησιν, κατά την οποίαν εθέαθησαν δύο περίεργοι "επιβάται" εις το Περού, οι οποίοι άμα αντελήφθησαν, ότι παρετηρούντο, επέβησαν εσπευσμένως του ιπταμένου των δίσκου, και εξηφανίσθησαν κατόπιν απότομου εκκινήσεως ή οποία θα είχε σαν αποτέλεσμα την μοιραίαν σύνθλιψιν ενός ανθρώπου ή άλλου ζωντανού γήινου οργανισμού.

Η τότε δοθείσα περιγραφή των υποθετικών «ξένων» επισκεπτών μας, ήτο η εξής : ύψος περίπου εν μέτρον, το κεφάλι ευρίσκετο εντός ενός μεταλλικού σκαφάνδρου, προφανώς λόγω της ακαταλληλότητος της γήινης ατμόσφαιρας δια την αναπνοήν των διπόδων «ανθρωπάκων» αυτών.
Κατόπιν της δημιουργηθείσης εντυπώσεως εις την κοινήν γνώμην εδημοσιεύθησαν περίπου επίσημοι διαψεύσεις ιδίως εξ Αμερικανών πηγών με την προσθήκην μάλιστα ότι όσοι πιστεύουν ή διαδίδουν αυτού του είδους πράγματα, θα έπρεπε να εγκλεισθούν εις Ψυχιατρεία.
Δεν θα ωμιλούσα καθόλου δια την εμφάνισιν αυτών των υποτιθεμένων εξωκόσμων επισκεπτών εάν δεν υπήρχον εις το ήδη αναφερθέν σύγγραμμα του Michel, πολλαπλαί παρατηρήσεις "επιβατών" ιπταμένων δίσκων.
Ιδού, κατά χρονολογικήν σειράν αι εμφανίσεις αυταί :
1.
26/9/1954.
Εις επιβάτης, πλησίον ιπταμένου δίσκου, προσγειωμένου παρά την Grenoble.
Ο επιβάτης ούτος μόλις έγινεν αντιληπτή η παρουσία του, επεβιβάσθη εσπευσμένως του οχήματός του και εξηφανίσθη, κατόπιν αποτόμου εκκινήσεως, ακριβώς όπως εις την περυσινrjν περίπτωσιν του Περού.
2.
Την επομένην 27/9/1954 εθεάθησαν εις επιβάτης πλησίον του Clermont-Fernand και δύο άλλοι επιβάται πλησίον του Perpignan. Και εις τας δύο περιπτώσεις, απότομος απο-γείωσις των ιπταμένων δίσκων άμα τη εμφανίσει των πολλών παρατηρητών. 3.
Την μεθεπομένην, 29/9/1954 τρεις επιβάται πλησίον της πόλεως Tours.
Εξαφάνισις αυτών, ακριβώς όπως και εις τας προηγουμένας περιπτώσεις.
4.
Την 3/10/1954 Εις επιβάτης πάλιν πλησίον της πόλεως Tours και εις επιβάτης, πλησίον της πολεcυς St. Nazaire.
Η αυτή ακριβώς συμπεριφορά των επιβατών.
5.
7/10/1954 Εις επιβάτης παρά το Metz και δυο επιβάται μεταξύ Reims και Παρισίων.
Πάλιν η αυτή ακριβώς συμπεριφορά αυτών άμα τη εμφανίσει ανθρώπων.
6.
11/10/1954 Εις επιβάτης εις την Νότιον Γαλλίαν, πλησίον της Toulouse, άλλοι τρεις επιβάται πλησίον της Mulhouse, και τέσσαρες επιβάται πλησίον του Bordeaux.
Πάλιν η αυτή απότομος απογείωσις των ιπταμένων δίσκων άμα τη εμφανίσει ανθρώπων.
7.
Την επομένην 12/10/1954 εις επιβάτης παρά τη πόλει Limoges έτερος επιβάτης παρά την Dijon και άλλοι τρεις επιβάται πλησίον της Toulouse.
Πάντοτε η αυτή συμπεριφορά άμα τη ανακαλύψει αυτών.
ΜΕΡΑΝΑΙΟΣ :
Τί είναι τo αξιοσημείωτο στις περιπτώσεις αυτές ;
ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ :
1.
Δεν πρόκειται πλέον περί μιας μεμονωμένης εμφα-νίσεως ενός μεμονωμένου υποθετικού ταξιδιώτου, ξένου προς τον πλανήτην μας. αλλά περί μεγάλου αριθμού αυτών.
2.
Εις όλας τας αναφερθείσας περιπτώσεις οι εξωγήινοι επισκέπται δεν εθεάθησαν, έκαστος υπό ενός μόνον ανθρώπου, αλλά υπό πληθώρας αυτών, αγνώστων μεταξύ των, και αγνοούντων την κατάθεσιν των άλλων.
3.
Αι παρατηρήσεις εγένοντο εις διαφόρους πόλεις της Γαλλίας κατά την αυτήν περίπου ώραν, αποκλειομένης της δυνατότητας της συνεννοήσεως μεταξύ των διαφόρων παρατηρητών.
Παρά ταύτα αι περιγραφαί όλων των παρατηrηρητών συνέπιπτον εις τον εξής χαρακτηρισμόν των ξένων επισκεπτών.
Οι επισκέπται ούτοι ήσαν ύψους μεταξύ 90 και 110 εκατοστών περίπου. Είχον περίπου το σχήμα ενός ανθρώπου, με φαρδιές πλάτες, δύο χέρια και δύο πόδια και με ίδιον τον χαρακτηριστικόν βηματισμόν.
Η σχετικώς μεγάλη κεφαλή ευρίσκετο εντός μεταλλικού σκαφάνδρου, προφανώς λόγω της ακαταλληλότητος του ατμοσφαιρικού αέρος δια την αναπνοήν των όντων αυτών.
Ουδεμίαν εχθρικήν στάση έδειξαν έναντι των προστρεξάντων ανθρώπων αλλ' επιβιβάζοντο, αμέσως αμα τη ανακαλύψει των επί του σκάφους των το οποίον εξηφανίζετο αποτόμως με επιτάχυνσιν η οποία θα ήτο θανατηφόρος ακόμη και δια τους συγχρόνους γήινους αστροναύτες μας.
4.
Διαπιστώνω το καταπληκτικόν γεγονός ότι η περιγραφή των εξωγήινων επισκεπτών του 1954 της Γαλλίας συμπίπτει απολύτως με την περιγραφήν των 2 υποθετικών εξωγήινων επιβατών της Νοτίου Αμερικής του έτους 1965.
Δύναται σχεδόν μετά πάσης βεβαιότητος να αποκλεισθή το ενδεχόμενον ότι οι εκεί προστρέξαντες άνθρωποι είχον γνώσιν της σχετικής περιγραφής εις το βιβλίον του Michel, επειδή επρόκειτο περί απλών ψαράδων, αγνοούντων ασφαλώς την Γαλλικήν γλώσσαν.
Και τώρα θέλω να διευκρινίσω κάτι.
Περιωρίσθην εις την πιστήν μεταβίβασιν των ως άνω γεγονότων εκ του συγγράμματος του Aime Michel.
Φρονώ ότι ανέφερον αρκετά στοιχεία τα οποία επιτρέπουν εις τους σημερινούς μου ακροατάς να μορφώσουν οι ίδιοι γνώμην εάν τα όσα αναφέρωνται εις το σύγγραμμα Michel δύνανται να θεωρηθούν πιστευτά ή όχι.
Τονίζω όμως το εξής περιστατικόν, το οποίον κατά την γνώμην μου έχει βαρύνουσαν σημασίαν :
Το σύγγραμμα του Michel επρολόγισεν ο Διοικητής της Αεραμύνης της Κεντρικής Ευρώπης (ΝΑΤΟ), Στρατηγος του Στρατού Αέρος Chassin, όστις εφιστά την προσοχήν του Κοινού επί της υπό του Michel συλλεχθείσης ύλης και των εξ αυτής δυναμένων να προκύψουν συμπερασμάτων.
Επαναλαμβάνω, ότι περιορίζομαι εδώ εις μίαν απλήν σύνοψιν του περιεχομένου του βιβλίου του Michel.
Προσωπικώς δεν λαμβάνω θέσιν τοσούτω μάλλον καθ' όσον τυγχάνει γνωστή η αντίληψίς μου, ότι αποκλείω, λόγω καθαρώς βιολογικών συνθηκών, την εκτέλεσιν υπό του Ανθρώπου ταξιδίων μεγάλης χρονικής διαρκείας εκτός του αμέσου περι-βάλλοντος της Γης.
Κατά τη γνώμην μου, πράγματι η σημερινή Τεχνική επιτρέπει μεν την αποστολήν πυραύλων εις το Διάστημα εντός του Ηλιακού μας Συστήματος, η κατασκευή όμως του ανθρωπίνου οργανισμού είναι προσηρμοσμένη προς τα συνθήκας ζωής επί της Γης και δεν δύναται να ανθέξη εις τας βιολογικής φύσεως δοκιμασίας ενός διαπλανητικού ταξιδίου.
Όσοι μιλούν και γράφουν περί αντιθέτου παρασύρονται απλώς από την καθαρώς τεχνικής πλευράν του προβλήματος και παραβλέπουν την ουσίαν της υποθέσεως, δηλαδή ότι μόνον περί αυτομάτων μηχανημάτων δύνανται να γίνει λόγος και ουχί περί επανδρωμένων εξωγαλαξιακών σκαφών.
Αυτά, από του 1945 και πέραν, έγραφον και εδίδασκον εις το Πολυτεχνείον, και δεν επείσθην ότι αι αντιλήψεις μου αύται είναι υπερμέτως απαισιόδοξοι.
Όπως είπα, αφήνω εις τους ακροατάς μου να κρίνουν μόνοι τους εκ των εκτεθέντων περιστατικών εάν πράγματι μας επισκέπτωνται εξωγήινα όντα.
Τούτο όμως ουδόλως αλλάζει την αντίληψίν μου περί της αδυναμίας του ανθρώπου να εκτελή διαπλανητικά ταξίδια επειδή εις την περίπτωσιν των περιγραφέντων εξωγήινων επισκεπτών μας δεν πρόκειται ασφαλώς περί όντων σωματικής κατασκευής ως των Ανθρώπων της Γης.
Το απλούν γεγονός όμως της ομαδικής μάλιστα επισκέψεως της Γής υπό των κατοίκων ενός αλλού Πλανήτπυ, προϋποθέτει αναγκαστικώς μίαν διανοητικήν, ασφαλώς δε και σωματικήν, ανωτέραν στάθμην εξελίξεως αυτών.
Το να διαπιστώνωμεν την ύπαρξιν περιέργων και κατππληκτικών σειρών τροχιών lπταμένων Δίσκων εις τον Ουρανόν, ανταποκρίνεται προς την ανθρωπίνην μας στάθμην αντιλήψεως.
Ενώπιον όμως της αγνώστου εις ημάς πραγματικότητος, ίσως να φερώμεθα εις την περίπτωσιν αυτήν, όπως ο ποντικός ο οποίος αναγνωρίζει εις εν βιβλίον μόνον εκείνο το οποίον είναι της στάθμης αντιλήψεως αυτού, δηλαδή εάν το βιβλίον τούτο έχη ναι ή όχι καλήν γεύσιν, χωρίς να δυνηθή να διακρίνει το πνευματικόν περιεχόμενον του βιβλίου.

ΜΕΡΑΝΑΙΟΣ :
Ποιά είναι η στάσις που μπορεί να πάρη o άνθρωπος εμπρός εις την ανεξήγητον φύσιν αυτών των φαινομένων ;
ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ :
Ο άνθρωπος μπορεί να πάρη μίαν από τις κατωτέρω στάσεις :
1.
Την στάσιν του διανοητικώς πρωτογόνου, όστις αποδέχεται με πίστιν τας πλέον περιέργους αφηγήσεις, όστις παραδέχεται ευκολώτατα τα «Υπερφυσικά> φαινόμενα, όστις δεν προβαίνει εις την κριτικήν των μαρτυριών και όστις, ώς εκ τούτου, συχνάκις είναι θύμα απατεώνων και τυχοδιωκτών.
Πολλά εκ των διαφόρων παραλόγων Δογμάτων, τα οποία κατ' αρχήν δέον να γίνουν αποδεκτά άνευ ουδεμίας δυνατότητας, έστω και στοιχειώδους λογικής κρίσεως, ανήκουν πολλάκις εις την κατηγορίαν αυτήν.
2.
Την στάσιν του πνευματικώς ισχυρού Ανθρώπου, πεπεισμένου ότι γνωρίζει τα πάντα και όστις αγανακτεί αντιμετωπίζων ξαφνικά φαινόμενα, τα οποία αντίκεινται εις τας γνώσεις και πεποιθήσεις του.
Μή δυνάμενος να εύρη εντός των γνώσεών του την εξήγησιν των υπ' όψιν περιέργων φαινομένων, προτιμά να αμφιβάλλη περί της γνησιότητος αυτών και να αποκρούη ακόμη και τα πλέον αναμφίβολα γεγονότα και τούτο ίνα μή θέση την πίστην αυτού υπό αμφιβολίαν.
Από την εποχής του Κοπερνίκου κcιι του Γαλιλαίου, η Ιστορία απέδειξεν ότι ο εγωκεντρισμός ανθρώπων του είδους αυτού, αποτελεί τον μεγαλύτερον κίνδυνον διά την Επισττjμην.
3.
Την στάσιν του πραγματικού επιστήμονος, όστις περιορίζεται εις τα γεγονότα διά να τα παρατηρήση, να τα συγκεντρώση, να τα ερμηνεύση και να τα συντονίση.
Είναι η στά-σις της μετριοφροσύνης και της υποταγής εις την πραγματικότητα.
Όσον η διανοητική στάθμη του ανθρώπου δεν επαρκεί ακόμη διά να κατασκευάση αντικείμενα του είδους των Ιπταμένων Δίσκων, το απλούν γεγονός της εμφανίσεως αυτών ήτο αρκετόν δια να διατυπωθή μία θεωρία βάσει της οποίας ολόκληρος η κατασκευή, αλλά και η συμπεριφορά των Ιπταμένων Δίσκων, εισέρχεται πλέον εντός του πλαισίου των τεχνικώς εξηγησίμων φαινομένων.
ΜΕΡΑΝΑΙΟΣ :
Διετυπώθη θεωρία που να εξηγή αυτά τα φαινομενα ;
ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ :
Πρόκειται περί της θεωρίας του Γάλλου Plantier η οποίο συνίσταται εις το εξής :
Η καθημερινή πείρα μας διδάσκει ότι όταν αφαιρέσωμεν το στήριγμα οιουδήποτε αντικειμένου τούτο πίπτει με διεύθυνσιν προς το κέντρον της Γης.
Πρόκειται περί του αποτελέσματος της δυνάμεως βαρύτητος.
Ας υποθέσωμεν ότι θα μας ήτο δυνατόν να χαληναγωγήσωμεν την δύναμιν αυτήν, να την εξουδετερώσωμεν, να την κατευθύνωμεν προς οιανδήποτε διεύθυνσιν και να την πολλαπλασιάσωμεν κατά βούλησιν.
Τί θα συμβή :
1.
Θα ήτο αρκετον να κατευθύνωμεν την δύναμιν αυτήν προς τα άνω και να την καταστήσωμεν ισχυροτέραν της γήινης έλξεως, δια να πετάξη παν αντικείμενον προς τα άνω, ή μcιλλον, διά να πίπτη τούτο προς τα άνω.
2.
Αντί το αντικείμενο να πίπτη προς τα άνω, θα ήτο δυνατόν, προσανατολίζοντας την διεύθυνσιν της υποθετικrjς δυνάμεως καταλλήλως, να πετύχωμεν μίαν «πτώσιν» προς οιανδήποτε επιθυμητήν κατεύθυνσιν.
Διευκρινίζω ότι η ως άνω υποθετική δύναμις θα έπρεπε να είναι της αυτής ακριβώς φύσεως όπως και η Δύναμις της Βαρύτητος.
Τούτο σημαίνει ότι, η δράσις της υποθετικής δυνάμεως αυτής θα έπρεπε να εμφανίζεται ταυτοχρόνως επί πάντων των ατόμων της μάζης ενός σώματος και ουχί μόνον εις το σημείον εφαρμογrjς αυτής, επί της εξωτερικής επιφανείας του σώματος τούτου.
Μία δύναμις του είδους αυτού είναι τελείως άγνωστος εις την Επιστήμην της σήμερον. Πρόκειται περί μιας υποθέσεως του Γάλλου Plantier και θα ονομάζω εις το εξής την δύναμιν αυτήν "Δύναμιν Plantier".
Ιδού η ουσιώδης διαφορά μεταξύ μιάς κοινής δυνάμεως και μιάς δυναμεως Plantier, όπου επονολαμβάνω ότι, η «Δύναμις Plantier» δεν είναι τίποτε άλλο από εν είδος Δυνάμεως Βαρύτητος, η οποία Θα ηδύνατο όμως να προσανατολίζεται προς μίαν οιανδήποτε διεύθυνσιν και να παράγεται υπό οιανδήποτε έντασιν.
Υποτεθείσθω οτι, έχομεν σιδηροδρομικόν συρμόν αποτελούμενον εξ εννέα βαγονίων, όπου η ηλεκτροκίνητος μηχανή ευρίσκεται όπισθεν του συρμού και προώρισται να ωθή τα έμπροσθεν αυτής ευρισκόμενα οχήματα προς τα εμπρός.
Υποτεθείσθω επί πλέον, ότι τα οχήματα αυτά είναι ελαφροτάτης κατασκευής π.χ. εκ λεπτών ξυλίνων πήχεων.
Υποτεθείσθω τέλος ότι, δια την κίνησιν του συρμού διαθέτομεν δέκα ισχυροτάτους κινητήρας, τοποθετημένους εντός του τελευταίου οχήματος, εν είδει ουτοκινηταμάξης, και ότι θέτομεν αποτόμως εις κίνησιν άπαντας τους κινητήρας.
Το αποτέλεσμα θα είναι, φυσικά, η καταστροφή, τουλάχιστον αρκετών εκ των ελαφρών ξυλίνων βογονιών, τα οποία θα δεχθούν την απότομον ισχυροτάτην κρούσιν την προερχομένην εκ των όπισθεν αυτών.
Το παράδειγμα τούτο μας παρουσιάζει το αποτέλεσμα της εφαρμογής μιας κοινής δυνάμεως.
Η «Δύναμις Plantier», όμως ωρίσθη ως ενεργούσα ταυτοχρόνως επί πάντων των ατόμων της μάζης ενός σώματος.
Εις το προαναφερθέν παράδειγμα, δυνάμεθα τότε να θεωρήσωμεν ότι, εις έκαστον εκ των εννέα ξυλίνων βαγονίων και εις το τελευταίον όχημα ετοποθετήθη ανά εις κινητήρ.
Είναι φανερόν, ότι η απότομος εκκίνησης και των δέκα κινητήρων μαζί ουδεμίαν θα επιφέρη καταστροφήν εις τα ξύλινα βαγόνια, καθ' όσον ταύτα Θα εκκινήσουν ταυτοχρόνως με την αυτήν ακριβώς επιτάχυνσιν.
Διαπιστώνομεν δηλαδή την αυτήν συμπεριφοράν την οποίαν έχουν τα σώματα το πίπτοντα εν κενώ τα οποία αποκτούν την αυτήν ταχύτητα, αδιαφόρως αν συναρμολογούνται από τμήματα διαφόρων πυκνοτήτων και διαφόρου αντοχής.
3.
Δεχόμεθα ότι η δράσις της υποθετικής «Δυνάμεως Plantier> δεν περιορίζεται μόνον εις το σώμα επί του οποίου δρα αυτή, αλλά και εις τα πέριξ αυτού, φθίνουσα όμως εν αναλογία προς την απόστασιν.
Το περιστατικόν τούτο έχει υψίστην σημασίαν, εάν εξετάσωμεν διάφορα ανεξήγητα φαινόμενα, τα οποία συνδέονται με την γνωστήν εμφάνισιν των «Ιπτάμενων Δίσκων».
ΜΕΡΑΝΑΙΟΣ :
Ποιά είναι τα ανεξήγητα φαινόμενα ;
ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ :
Τα ανεξήγητα ταύτα φαινόμενα είναι τα εξής :
1.
Απόλυτος έλλειψις θορύβου, παρά την μεγάλην ταχύτητα κινήσεως εντός της ατμοσφαίρας.
2.
Θερμική αντίστασις μή ανταποκρινομένη πρός εκείνην πάντων των γνωστών μετάλλων.
3.
Εντύπωσις μιας, υπό λογικών όντων, καθοδηγουμένης πτήσεως, παρά την θερμοκρασίαν και τας αποτόμους επιταχύνσεις, προφανώς αντιφυσιολογικάς, κατά τας ανθρώπινας αντιλήψεις.
Συμφώνως με τον ορισμόν της υποθετικής "Δυνάμεως Plantier" ο αήρ ο περιβάλλων εν αντικείμενον υφιστάμενος και αυτός την επίδρασιν της δυνάμεως ταύτης ακολουθεί το αντικείμενον εις την κίνησιν αυτού. Συνεπώς, δεν θα υπάρξη τριβή μεταξύ του αντικειμένου και του περιβάλλοντος τούτο cιέρος.
Συνεπώς πάλιν ουδεμία, εμφάνισις Θερμότητος, ακριβώς ελλείψει του φαινομένου της τριβής. Ουδείς θόρυβος, εν αντιθέσει με την περίπτωσιν μιας σφαίρας πυροβόλου όπλου, η οποία σφυρίζει λόγω της τριβής της μετά του ατμοσφαιρικού αέρος.
Ιδού η εξήγησις των τελείως αθόρυβων, απιστεύτως αποτόμων κινήσεων των Ιπταμένων Δίσκων.
Ιδού η εξήγησις της απιστεύτως μεγάλης Θερμικrjς αντοχής αυτών.
Ιδού η εξήγησις του γεγονότος ότι υποτιθέμενοι ζώντες οργανισμοί, ευρισκόμενοι εντός των οχημbτων τούτων, ουδεμίαν ενόχλησιν υφίστανται εκ των αποτόμων μεταβολών της ταχύτητος και της διευθύνσεως του οχήματός των, του κοινώς γενομένου και ενίοτε τόσον ειρωνευμένου Ιπταμένου Δίσκου.
Επαναλαμβάνω την εξήγησιν:
άπαντα τα ανεξήγητα φαινόμενα των μυστηριωδών lπταμένων Δίσκων εξηγούνται διά του απλουστέρου δυνατού τρόπου, εάν παραδεχθώμεν οτι, οι επιβαίνοντες τούτων κάμνουν χρήσιν μιας δυνάμεως, αγνώστου σήμερον ακόμη εις την Επιστήμην του Ανθρώπου της οποίας τας ιδιότητας καθώρισε πρώτος ο Γάλλος Plantier.
Πρόκειται απλούστατα περί μιας δυνάμεως, ομοίας προς την Δύναμιν Βαρύτητος την οποίαν όμως ο χειριστής αυτής δύναται να κατευθύνη προς οιανδήποτε έντασιν.
Τούτο φυσικα προϋποθέτει μίαν τεχνολογική εξέλιξιν των κατόχων των Ιπταμένων Δίσκων, κατά πολύ πέραν της στάθμης των γνώσεων των Ανθρώπων της Γης.
Οπότε και τίθεται ευλόγως το ερώτημα, κατά πόσον είναι παραδεκτή η σκέψις περί της υπάρξεως ή μη λογικώς σκεπτομένων εμψύχων όντων επί των Πλανητών του Σύμπαντος.

ΜΕΡΑΝΑΙΟΣ :
Εις τι καταλήγει ή τελευταία πείρα της επιστήμης της αστρονομίας ;
ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ :
Αι τελευταία αποκτήσεις της Αστρονο-μίας καταλήγουν εις το συμπέρασμα ότι :
Πλανήται, περισσότερον ή ολιγώτερον, όμοιοι προς την Γην, και εις αριθμόν πολλών δισεκατομμυρίων, είναι σκορπισμένοι εν είδει κόνεως, εις το αχανές Αστρικόν Διάστημα.
Ταυτοχρόνως όμως, αι τελευ-ταίαι θεωρίαι επί της εμφανίσεως και της εξελίξεως της ζωής, διδάσκουν, ότι η Ζωή εμφανίζεται και εξελίσσεται προς το Πνεύμα, αυτομάτως τρόπον τινά, οσάκις υφίστανται αι αναγκαίοι προϋποθέσεις δια την ύπαρξιν αυτής.
Όθεν, η Ζωή και το Πνεύμα, ως κατάληξις αυτής, φαίνο-νται ως σκορπισμένα εντός του απείρου Διαστήματος εις την αυτήν περίπου αναλογίαν, όπως και αυτή η Ύλη.
Σήμερον, μόλις πεντακοσίας χιλιάδας χρόνια μετά την εμφανισίν του, ο άνθρωπος ετοιμάζεται να εισδύση εντός του διαπλανητικού διαστήματος.
Θεωρούμεν τον Ανθρωπον ως την κορυφήν της εξελίξεως ζώντων οργανισμών επί της Γης.
Επειδή, όμως το Πνεύμα είναι η αυτόματος κατάληξις της Ζωής, έπεται ότι, πάντα τα συστήματα εξελίξεως περισσότερον προκεχωρημένα του ανθρώπου, επραγματοποίησαν ήδη αυτήν την είσδυσιν και μάλιστα εις πολύ μεγάλων αριθμόν σημείων του Σύμπαντος.
Αλλά, είναι πιθανόν ότι μέγιστος αριθμός «Πολιτισμών» έφθανεν ήδη και ξεπέρασεν εις άλλους Κόσμους, το σημείον εκείνο, όπου θα ευρεθώμεν εμείς τότε. Δια τον λόγον τούτον, το ουσιώδες ερώτημα δεν είναι να γνωρίζωμεν εάν μας επεσκέφθησαν ήδη διαπλανητικά σκάφη, κοινώς "lπτάμενοι Δίσκοι", αλλά να γνωρίζωμεν εάν τα σκάφη ταύτα εγένετο ήδη αντιληπτά.
Επειδή δύναται να θεωρηθεί ως βέβαιον ότι η σκέψις δημιουργίας διαπλανητικών σκαφών, ουδόλως αποτελεί γήϊνον μόνον προνόμιον.
Μ' άλλα λόγια, το μυστήριον έγκειται εις το ότι, εάν τα ξένα διαπλανητικά σκάφη έχουν γίνει πράγματι ήδη αντιληπτά δια ποιον λόγγων ταύτα εγένοντο ορατά μέχρι σήμερον εις τόσον μικρόν αριθμόν. Επειδή λογικώς το διάστημα θα έπρεπε να διασχίζεται από σκάφη του είδους τούτου, όπως διασχίζονται οι ωκεανοί από τα πλοία.
Η υπόθεσις, κατά την οποίαν η γήϊνη ζωή είναι μοναδικόν φαινόμενον εντός ολοκλήρου του Σύμπαντος, έχει ήδη αποκλεισθεί διά της επιστημονικής ερεύνης των τελευταίων ετών.
Πράγματι, ως γνωστόν, ο Αμερικανός Αστρονόμος Sinton ανεύρε, προ ετών ήδη, εντός του φάσματος του πλανήτου Άρεως δύο φασματικάς γραμμάς της ενώσεως Ανθραξ - Υδρογόνον, αι οποίαι είναι χαρακτηριστικαί πάντων των γήϊνων οργανικών μορίων, και συγκεκριμένως των Φυτικών τοιούτων.
Πέραν όμως των δύο τούτων φασματικών γραμμών, o Sinton ανεκάλυψε και μίαν τρίτην τοιαύτην, η οποία δεν συμπεριλαμβάνεται εις το υπέρυθρον φασμα των γήϊνων οργανικών ενώσεων.
Η φιλοσοφική ερμηνεία της ανακαλύψεως ταύτης του Αμερικανού Sinton ανοίγει τας θύρας εις την πλέον τολμηράν φαντασίαν.
Εκ της διαφόρου φυσικο-χημικής συστάσεως των οργανικών μορίων του πλανήτου Aρεως έπεται σχεδόν αναγκαστικώς το συμπέρασμα, ότι και τά οργανικά, έστω και φυτικά μόνον μόρια, εις τον πλανήτην εκείνον, σχηματίζουν πιθανώς ζώντας οργανισμούς τελείως διαφόρου φύσεως, οπωσδήποτε αγνώστου επί της Γης.
ΜΕΡΑΝΑΙΟΣ :
Είναι μοναδικόν φαινόμενον η ζωή επί της Γης ; ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ :
Η υπόθεσις κατά την οποίαν μεταξύ όλων των ζώων του Σύμπαντος, η γήϊνη ζωή είναι η μόνη η οποία εξελίχθη μέχρι του Πνεύματος, δεν δύναται να ελεχθή.
Εν τούτοις, μέχρι τούδε όλαι αι πρόοδοι της Επιστήμης κατέληξαν εις την οπισθοχώρησιν των ανθρωποκεντρικών αντιλήψεων.
Η υπόθεσις κατά την οποίαν ουδεμία Αστρική ζωή έχει υπερβή την σημερινήν στάθμη της ανθρωπότητος, δύναται να ερμηνευθή δια δύο διαφόρων τρόπων.
Κατά τον πρώτον εξ αυτών θεωρούμεν ότι η γήινη ανθρωπότης ευρίσκεται επί κεφαλής της Αστρικής εξελίξεως, το οποίον σημαίνει ότι όλα τ' άλλα βιολογικά συστήματα ευρίσκονται εν καθυστερήσει, εν συγκρίσει μεθ' ημών.
Μία αντίληψις του είδους τούτου θα ήτο καθαρώς ανθρωποκεντρική και, ως εκ τούτου, δεν δύναται να ελεγχθή.
Ο έτερος τρόπος της ερμηνείας θα ήτο ότι, η ζωή δεν θα ηδύνατο ποτέ να υπερβή το στcιδιον του Ανθρώπου, και δή του ανθρώπου του εικοστού αιώνος.
Είναι φανερόν πού άγει μία υπόθεσις του είδους αυτού.
Προφανώς εις την αντίληψιν ότι η πρόοδος περιέχει εν αυτή, την ίδιαν αυτής καταστροφήν.
Η ζωή θα ανήρχετο τόσον υψηλά μόνον διά ν' αυτοκτονήση.
Θα ήτo τούτον εν όνειρον μεγίστης απαισιοδοξίας δια την κρίσιν του οποίου δεν διαθέτομεν παρά αορίστους μόνον ηθικάς αντιλήψεις.
Πολλοί επιστήμονες θεωρούν ότι η κατάκτησις του Διαστήματος υπό οργανωμένων όντων θα είναι αιωνίως περιορισμένη υπό των ορίων εκάστου Ηλιακού συστήματος.
Πράγματι, τα άστρα είναι παρά πολύ απομεμακρυσμένα το εν του άλλου δια να επιτρέπουν την μετάβασιν εκ του ενός εις το άλλο.
Κατά την θεωρίαν της Σχετικότητος θα εχρειάζετο απείρως μεγάλη ενέργεια, συνεπώς απραγματοποιήσιμος, δια να δοθή εις οιονδήποτε σώμα η ταχύτης του φωτός, δηλαδή τριακόσιαι χιλιάδες χιλιόμετρα ανά δευτερόλεπτον.
Ακόμη και μόνον με ταχύτητα εκατόν χιλιάδων χιλιομέτρων ανά δευτερόλεπτο η μετάβασις από τον Ήλιον εις το πλησιέστερον άστρον θ' απήτει εν τέταρτον αιώνος, οπότε επιχειρήσεις του είδους τούτου θα υπερέβαινον την ζωήν ενός ανθρώπου.
ΜΕΡΑΝΑΙΟΣ :
Πώς τίθεται το θέμα της επικοινωνίας μεταξύ όντων διαφορετικής πνευματικής στcιθμης ;
ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ :
Εκ πρώτης όψεως το αδύνατον μιας πνευματικής επαφής, μεταξύ δύο εξειλιγμένων όντων, φαίνεται ως παράδοξον.
Υπάρχει επί της Γης πληθώρα Πνευματικών επιπέδων, από τα βακτήρια μέχρι τον άνθρωπον.
Υπάρχει το επίπεδον του ανθρώπου, το επίπεδον των πιθήκων, το επίπεδον των εντόμων και ούτω καθ' εξής. Εις την ζούγκλαν ή εις το δάσος όπου τα ζώα ζουν ελευθέρως συμφώνως με τους νόμους της ζωτικής ισορροπίας. είναι γνωστόν ότι υφίσταται μία συνεχής ανταλλαγή πληροφορίων μεταξύ ζώων του αυτού είδους, αλλά και μεταξύ ζώων διcιφορων ειδών.
Ιδού όμως η πρώτη εμφάνισης του πνευματικού επιπέδου των διαφόρων ειδών.
Ο άνθρωπος δύναται να εκμάθη και τούτο εγένετο ήδη εις ευθείας κλίμακα, την γλώσσαν των διαφόρων ζώων, πιθήκων, πτηνών, και λοιπά.
Ο άνθρωπος δύναται ν' αποταθή π.χ. προς εν καναρίνι και να του σφυρίξη, εις την γλώσσαν του καναρινιού, εν είδει συνδιαλέξεως, ωρισμένας ιδέας, εντός της περιοχής αντιλήψεως του πτηνού τούτου.
Το καναρίνι θα είναι εις θέσιν ν' αντιληφή την έννοιαν ωρισμένων συνθημάτων της γλώσσης του π.χ. "κίνδυνος" ή "είμαι αρσενικόν".
Αποκλείεται όμως να εξηγηθή ποτέ εις την γλώσσαν των καναρινιών το Θεώρημα του Πυθαγόρα.
Αντιθέτως, όμως κατόπιν σχετικής επιμονής ουδόλως αποκλείεται o Aνθρωπος να δυνηθή να καταλάβη εξ ολοκλήρου απάσας τας ιδέας πνευματικού επιπέδου των καναρινιών.
Συγκεκριμένως ο άνθρωπος δύναται να έλθη εις πνευματικήν επcιφήν με όλους τους ζώντας οργανισμούς υπό τον όρον το πνευματικόν επίπεδον των να είναι κατώτερον του ιδικού του επιπέδου ή μάλλον υπό τον όρον ότι το επίπεδόν μας να περιέχη το πνευματικόν επίπεδον αυτών.
Υπό τας συνθήκας αυτάς η σύγχρονος έρευνα επί του ανθρωπίνου ψυχισμού και του ψυχισμού των ζώων, απέδειξαν ότι ανώτερος ψυχισμός θα ηδύνατο να έλθη εις πνευματικήν επαφήν μαζί μας, επί του επιπέδου μας του Ανθρώπου.
ΜΕΡΑΝΑΙΟΣ :
Τι όμως πρέπει να σκεφθούμε δια την αντίθετον περίπτωσιν;
Δηλαδή ο άνθρωπος θα ελπίζη να έλθη εις πνευματικήν επαφήν με εν όν ανωτέρας της ιδικής του πνευματικής στάθμης ;
ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ :
Επί του ερωτήματος αυτού η απάντησις φαίνεται ότι πρέπει να είναι σαφώς αρνητική.
Ο σκύλος δεν διακρίνει τον κίονα ενός ναού από οιανδήποτε άλλη πέτραν, και τον ναόν από οιοδήποτε άλλον σπήλαιον.
Επειδή η διαφορά μεταξύ αυτών των πραγμάτων εντοπίζεται εις μίαν πνευματικήν στάθμην, η οποία δεν του είναι προσιτή.
Ο σκύλος «καταλα-βαίνει» εις ημάς μόνον εκείνο το οποίον ανήκει εις την πνευ-ματικήν του στάθμην.
Εκ των ως άνω έπεται ότι, εις τας σχέσεις μας με έμψυχα όντα ανωτέρας της ιδικής μας πνευματικής στάθμης θα ηδυνάμεθα να διακρίνωμεν μόνον τας πραγματικότητας της ανθρωπίνης στάθμης.
Παραδείγματος χάριν τας γεωμετρικcις γραμ-μάς.
Αλλά το ακατανόητο εις αυτάς θα ήτο το περιστατικόν ότι δεν θα ηδύνατο να προσδιοριστούν αύται εις την ανθρωπίνην γλώσσαν.
Ευρισκομεθcι εις το κατώφλιον του ιλίγγου.
Μη προχωρούμεν πέραν, προς το παρόν.

ΜΕΡΑΝΑΙΟΣ :
Μήπως ή «επαφή» εγένετο ήδη αλλά μας παρέμεινε άγνωστος ;
ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ :
Η υπόθεσις αυτή είναι η πλέον ενδια-φέρουσα όλων.
Επειδή εις το ερώτημα τούτο είμεθα υποχρεω-μένοι ν' απαντήσωμεν ότι μία επαφή του είδους τούτου δεν είναι αδύνατος.
Πράγματι, εάν η επαφή μεταξύ αυτών, δηλαδή των κατοίκων ενός ξένου πλανήτου και ημών πραγματοποιηθεί επί της σταdμης αυτών και ουχί επί της στάθμης της ιδικής μας, η επαφή αυτή θα παραμείνη ό,τι και αν κάμωμεν, άγνωστος δι' ημάς.
Και εδώ ακόμη ο προηγηθείς συλλογισμός μας επιτρέπει να σχηματίσωμεν μίαν ιδέαν περί ενός ζητήματος τόσον εκ πρώτης όψεως δυσνοήτου.
Αι περισσότεραι των σχέσεων μας με τα ζώα μένουν αυστηρώς και οριστικώς αδιάκριτοι δι' αυτά.
Τα αρνιά ουδέποτε θα γνωρίσουν ότι τα τρέφουν δια να πάρουν το μαλλί των και το κρέας των.
Βλέπουν μόνον το ψαλίδι και το σφαγείον, και δεν ημπορούν, δι' ουδενός τρόπου να προβλέψουν και ν' αποτρέψουν ούτε το ένα ούτε το άλλο, επειδή αυτού του είδους προβλέψεις δεν δύνανται να υπάρχουν εις τον ψυχισμόν ενός αρνιού.
Οι σκύλοι δεν γνωρίζουν και δεν δύνανται να γνωρίζουν ότι θα τους θανατώσουν όταν θα γηράσουν, εrτειδή ούτοι δεν δύνανται να γνωρίσουν τι θα πη να είναι ηλικωμένοι ή ν' αντιληφθούν ακόμη και την ιδέαν της ηλικίας.
Τα ζώα θα δυνηθούν να συζούν μαζί μας μέχρι τέλους των αιώνων χωρίς να αντιληφθούν ποτέ ότι η τύχη των διαρκώς επαίχθη εις περιοχάς αοράτους δι' αυτά καίτοι οι οφθαλμοί των ουδέποτε έπαυσαν να τας βλέπουν.
Προ ολίγων εκατοντάδων χιλιάδων ετών οι προγονοί μας, οι πρόγονοι ενός Πλάτωνος, ενός Νιούτον και ενός Αϊνστάιν, ήσαν ίσως εις την πνευματικήν στάθμην των σημερινών σκύλων και των αρνιών.
Πού θα βρεθή η σημερινή στάθμη ανθρώπων, μετά την παρέλευσιν μερικών ακόμη εκατοντάδων χιλιάδων ετών;
Υπάρχει εν ανώτατον όριον εις την άνοδον του ψυχισμού; Διατί να πιστεύσωμεν τούτο ;
ΜΕΡΑΝΑΙΟΣ :
Και γιατί να πιστεύσωμεν πως αν το όριο αυτό πράγματι υπάρχη, φθάσαμε ήδη σ' αυτό ;
ΣΑΝΤΟΡΙΝΗΣ :
Η απάντησις εις το ερώτημα :
«Διατί δεν υπάρχουν επισκέπτεται του Διαστήματος» ίσως να είναι η καταπληκτικής απλότητος τοιαύτης :
Δεν υπάρχουν επειδή μόνον οι οφθαλμοί μας τους βλέπουν και ουχί το πνεύμα μας, το οποίον είναι ανίκανον προς τούτο.
Η απουσία των θα ημπορούσε να είναι μόνον φαινομενική. Ο ποντικός ο οποίος τρώγει τα παλαιά μας βιβλία, βλέπει φυσικώς διά των οφθαλμών του.
Όλα όσα βλέπομεν εμείς τα βλέπει και ο ποντικός αλλά δεν δύναται να τα αντιληφθή.
Το σχήμα των γραμμάτων προβάλλεται επί του αμφιβληστροειδούς χιτώνος του, αλλά ο ποντικός ουδέποτε θα δυνηθή να τα διαβάση.
Εκ του ανθρωπίνου θεάματος θα βλέπη μόνον εκείνο το οποίον είναι της φύσεως του ποντικού.
Ακριβώς, ούτως έχει και το ζήτημα της αντιλήψεώς μας περί του Σύμπαντος.
Βλέπομεν όλα εκείνα τα οποία αντιστοιχούν εις την ανθρωπίνην στάθμην ή τας στάθμας κάτωθι αυτής.
Και εάν εν αστρικόν ον ανωτέρας της ιδικής μας πνευματικής στάθμης εμφανίζεται εις τov ουρανόν μος είμεθα εξ ίσου ανίκανοι να διακρίνωμεν τας πράξεις του και να αναλύσωμεν τας προθέσεις του όπως ένας ποντικός να διαβάση επιστημονικά συγγράμματα.
Όλαι αι σημεριναί μας βεβαιότητες άρχισαν από το στάδιον των υποθέσεων.
Αι πλέον βέβαια θετικότητες ήρχισαν από το στάδιον των ονείρων. Μη αρνούμεθα εις τους Ανθρώπους το δικαίωμα να ονειρεύονται, χωρίς όμως ταυτοχρόνως να τους διαφεύγη ότι ονειρεύονται.
Εν πρώτον όνειρον, εν πρώτον ερώτημα :
η σημερινή εξέλιξις της Επιστήμης της Βιολογίας μας ειτιτρέrιει να πιστέψωμεν ότι εις κάθε "ψυχικόν" φαινόμενον ανταποκρίνεται σαφώς και εν καθωρισμένον φυσικόν φαινόμενον, με άλλα λογcα, εάν εις κάθε ανθρωπίνην σκέψιν, όσο φευγαλέα, όσο λεπτή, όσον αφηρημένη και αν είναι αυτή, αντιστοιχεί μία χαρακτηριστική μεταβολή του εγκεφάλου, εν είδει π.χ. νευρικής ροής, ή απείρως λεπτών χημικών ή ηλεκτρικών φαινομένων και λοιπά.
Η απάντη-σις επί του ερωτήματος αυτού φαίνεται ότι μπορεί να είναι θε-τική.
Εν δεύτερον όνειρον, εν δεύτερον ερώτημα :
η σημερινή εξέλιξις της επιστημονικής ερεύνης μας επιτρέπει να ελπίζομεν ότι παν φυσικόν φαινόμενον θα δυνηθή, την μίαν ή την άλλην ημέραν, να μελετηθή και ν' αναλυθή πειραματικώς.
Η απάντησις επί του ερωτrjματος αυτού ήδη σήμερον είναι σαφώς θετική.
Εκ των άνω δύο ερωτημάτων και απαντήσεων δυνάμεθα να συμπεράνωμεν ότι συν τη προόδω της Επιστήμης, θα δυνηθώμεν την μίαν ή την άλλην ημέραν να προβώμεν εις την πειραματικήν εγγραφήν πασών των αποχρώσεων της Σκέψεως, όσον αυτή και αν είναι αφηρημένη, λεπτή και φευγαλέα.
Τούτο δεν αποτελεί μίαν βεβαιότητα, αλλά δύναται νcι θεωρηθή ως λίαν πιθανόν :
πράγματι ήδη σήμερον η ανθρωπίνη σκέψις εγγράφεται ευκόλως επί της ταινίας ενός εγκεφαλογράφου, αι δε καμπύλαι αυτού ήδη σήμερον ερμηνεύονται υπό Ψυχιάτρων δια την διάγνωσιν της ψυχικής καταστάσεως ενός Ανθρώπου.
Η λογική επέκτασις των συλλογισμών αυτών μας επιτρέ-πει όμως να διατυπώσωμεν μίαν υπόθεσιν :
υποτεθείσθω ότι "συνεργείον" ολόκληρον, ειδικευμένων κατοίκων ενός άλλου πλανήτου διασχίζει το Σύμπαν, εφωδιασμένον με τα αναγκαία όργανα δια την εγγραφήν της Σκέψεως επί ενός άλλου πλανήτου, π.χ. του ιδικού μας.
Το συνεργείον τούτο ερευνά συστηματικώς μίαν σαφώς καθωρισμένην περιοχήν, ως τούτο συνέβη εν Γαλλία κατά τας μνημονευθείσας ημέρας του Σεπτεμβρίου και Οκτωβρίου 1954 και φαίνεται ότι έκτοτε λαμβάνει χώραν εις Αργεντινήν, Περού και αλλού.
Τίποτε δεν μας εμποδίζει να παραδεχθώμεν ότι προϊόν της συστηματικής αυτής εξερευνήσεως θα είναι η εγγραφή ολοκλτjρου της Σκέψεως της περιεχομένης εντός της εξερευνηθείσης περιοχής.
Οπότε τίθεται το λογικόν ερώτημα :
δια ποίον λόγον οι κάτοχοι του συλλεχθέντος και αυτομάτως εγγραφέντος πλουσίου υλικού να ήρχοντο και εις προσωπική επαφήν με τους Ανθρώπους.
Προς τι θα είμεθα ενώπιον των μηχανών των γυμνοί, όσον και ένας πιστός ενώπιον του Θεού του.
Θα μας εγνώριζον καλύτερα από οτι εμείς οι ίδιοι γνωρίζομεν τον εαυτόν μας αφού εμείς επιδιώκομεν ανεπιτυχώς καθ' όλον τον βίον μας, το όνειρον να μάθωμεν τί είμεθα και τί θα γίνωμεν μετά τον θάνατόν μας.

ΤΕΛΟΣ

[dhatz]

Μια πολύ καλή σύνοψη του θέματος UFO είναι από το παλιό MUFON CT site του 1997.

Αυτο που διαπίστωσα ξανά και ξανά, είναι πως εδώ και πολλές δεκαετίες έχει γίνει πολύ καλή δουλειά (και μάλιστα με μηδενικούς χρηματικούς πόρους, καθαρά και μόνο χάρη στην εθελοντική συνεισφορά έργου απο πολύ ικανους ανθρωπους), που όμως οντας κατακερματισμένη και χωρίς επίσημη οργάνωση και ιστορικό Αρχείο, συνήθως χάνεται μέσα σε βουνά απο "σκουπίδια".


"UFO Report - a statement by a person or persons judged responsible and psychologically normal by commonly accepted standards, describing a personal visual or instrumentally aided perception of an object or light in the sky or on the ground and / or its assumed physical effects, that does not specify any known physical event, object, or process or any psychological event or process [even after examination by qualifed persons]..." Dr. J. Allen Hynek, Northwestern University, founder of the Center for UFO Studies.

If the only strange things seen in the sky were a few oddly moving lights, or some specks glinting in the sun, there would be no UFO problem. But there have been many close observations of these strange objects. In addition, physical traces of various kinds have been left behind, and witnesses have experienced physical and medical effects, including injury and death.

Of all of the reported sightings, between 5 and 25% (depending on the sample) remain unidentifiable to expert examination. These are the real UFOs.

If you think that reports of UFOs remain unidentified because there is insufficient information to perform an identification, you will find it hard to explain how the Battelle Institute, under contract to the Air Force, in an analysis of nearly 4,000 reports (Blue Book Special Report 14), found that a "good" (i.e. detailed) report was twice as likely as a "poor" (sketchy) report to be classed as unidentified (This was confirmed by a later study on a completely separate set of cases performed by the French organization GEPAN). You will also find it hard to explain why they also found that the "knowns" share almost nothing in common with the "unknowns".

If you think that reports of UFOs remain unidentified because the witnesses are perpetrating hoaxes, you should know that no major study has ever found more than a few percent of initial UFO reports to be hoaxes.

If you think that only unreliable individuals are reporters of UFOs, then you are unaware of the tens of thousands of reports generated by responsible police officers, pilots, military personnel, and ordinary people who were going about their normal business when they were confronted with something they had never imagined or desired, and which, in a matter of minutes, left them confused, amazed, or terrified.

In general, humans are good witnesses. They may not be able to identify what they see, but they usually provide sufficient information for experts to do so. More importantly, there is very little room for misinterpretation when an object approaches within a hundred yards of a witness, illuminating the scene and occluding more distant objects. When the same event is observed by multiple independent witnesses, the case is even stronger. And when traces such as burns, swirled grass, and indentations are left behind, it is possible to derive from direct measurement parameters such as weight and energy output.

Such measurements indicate that the landed UFO is an object between 15 and 100 feet in diameter, most commonly under 30 feet; it weighs between 30 and 60 tons; it emits visible light energy when airborne ranging from a few kW to hundreds of mW. It emits invisible electromagnetic energy at the high frequency end of the spectrum, including UV and soft x-rays, as shown by the many cases of skinburn and eye irritation. It occasionally emits harder radiation, which have led to symptoms of radiation sickness in witnesses who have closely approached the objects. However, lasting radioactivity, which would indicate the presence of radiation in or beyond the gamma band, have rarely been found at landing sites.

In flight, the UFO has no aerodynamic characteristics. It has no wings or visible propulsion systems, and, with few exceptions, makes no more than a soft humming or whining sound. In darkness, it is frequently observed to emit a colored luminosity which is both global and localized. It usually emits that luminosity in a shape which depends on its current maneuver. Though sometimes described as "flames", close observations have shown that this luminosity does not have a high temperature, and it probably represents an ionization of the local atmosphere similar to what occurs in a neon light.

Most UFOs are symmetrical objects with spherical, lenticular, elliptical, or cylindrical shapes. Some UFOs have a equatorial ring and are referred to as having a "saturn" shape. There are also flat bottomed disks and disks with domes. Some UFOs are very small (inches to feet) and some are very large (hundreds of feet). All of these forms have common flight characteristics. Sometimes, what may be the same object has been observed, and even photographed at different times and places, as described in a recent paper.

All UFOs are capable of incredible speeds. Reliable radar observations (in some cases with multiple sets at multiple frequencies) have documented speeds as high as 10,000 mph within the atmosphere, as long ago as the 1950s. High speeds alone do not distinguish the UFO, since such objects as meteors can attain similar speeds. But profiles of speed and altitude based on radar measurements and backed up by visual observations indicate that UFOs can and do undergo radical changes in both speed and altitude simultaneously. Other observations indicate a disregard for normal orientations, where the UFO is observed to hover on edge, flip upside down, or spin while hovering. A particularly characteristic maneuver is the "falling leaf", where the object swings like a pendulum from side to side while descending. This maneuver to lose altitude was first used in human flight by Paul Hill, the NASA engineer who invented the flying platform.

UFOs appear to be able to interfere with electrical systems, and seem especially interested in interfering with and disabling automobiles. The Levelland case is a classic among these cases; several cars across a wide area were stopped during close approach to a luminous UFO landed on the road in front of them - these encounters were witnessed within a short span of time by multiple independent witnesses. Television and radio interference have also been reported.

Extremely close observations of UFOs also yield reports of odors near UFOs. These odors are often reported as "ozone" or "formaldehyde", and in most cases are highly irritating.

UFOs do have solid surfaces, as has been shown by reports where witnesses have struck the objects with hands, rocks, or bullets. Interestingly, one case directly demonstrated the presence of a force field of some sort, when the witness noted that a thrown rock was deflected to the ground at a distance of about fifteen feet from a hovering UFO.

UFOs do land, and when they do so, they sometimes simply hover at a very low altitude, producing swirled grass, subsoil burning of plant root systems, and unusual effects on the exposed plants (usually changes in the chlorophyll). In other cases, they extend landing gear of some sort, usually legs with footpads. It is these landing gear which have left marks amenable to pressure analysis, and from which we have been able to derive the possible weight of the UFO.

Thus - the UFO: A solid object with weight, emitting energy, sound, and odor. In some cases interfering with automobile engines and electrical systems, in other cases affecting humans and animals with radiation, chemical, and / or sonic emissions. It is hard to understand such a clear pattern being ignored by science.

Many serious UFO researchers consider it premature to develop theories of the origin and intent of UFOs. However, other researchers have generated speculations, as yet, typically untestable, as to the nature of the UFO.

By far the most popular theory is the one of extraterrestrial origin. Writers such as Keyhoe, Lorenzen, Fuller, Fowler, Randle, and Hopkins have supported this theory. And there are certainly reasons to consider it, not least of which is the physical appearance and behavior of the objects, the geographic patterns of their appearance, the presence of humanoid, but clearly alien occupants, sample gathering activities by occupants, and, of course, the various accounts of abductions, where witnesses claim to have been taken aboard the object and given medical examinations, and in some cases to have communicated with their abductors. Some researchers claim that UFOs have crashed, and that remains of the occupants have been obtained by various governments (the most famous of these claims is, of course, the Roswell, NM incident). Paul Hill, a former NASA researcher, who developed the flying platform in the 1950s, had two UFO sightings, and based on his interest, developed an extensive theory of UFO propulsion in his excellent book "Unconventional Flying Objects: a scientific approach", and also showed that interstellar distances are not an insuperable obstacle to sufficiently motivated astronauts, due to the effects of relativity, which slow down apparent time as a vehicle approaches the speed of light.

Not all UFO researchers adhere to a view that the UFO is a solid, physical object in the ordinary sense. Some eminent researchers such as Jacques Vallee think that the UFO is "paraphysical" in nature - which is to say that it may represent an intrusion from another dimension, or a temporary construct of matter generated from energy controlled by a natural or intelligent source. Some cases which appear to show dematerialization of a UFO, or which indicate a specific knowledge of a witness and / or intrusion in a witness life could be evidence for such a view. Researchers who follow Vallee's example often draw parallels between folkloric accounts (such as those of elves and fairy apparitions) and modern UFO events, and hold that the UFO phenomenon may simply be a modern guise for a phenomenon which has been present since long before the modern UFO era. They also often describe the phenomenon as part of a "control" system, which operates on a level below the normal view of society, changing our mythic structures, and influencing the development of our civilization. They emphasize that this may or may not be the result of the action of an external intelligence.

Other researchers draw parallels between the behavior and appearance of UFOs and their occupants and other areas of study loosely referred to as "paranormal". John Keel is one of the most well known of this school, and his work has attempted to unify apparitions, "monsters", contactees, the Men-In-Black phenomenon, and cases which suggest direct intervention by the UFO source in the lives of witnesses. In the view of researchers such as Keel, the phenomenon is almost infinitely malleable, has extensive knowledge of individual humans and human history, and has both good and evil aspects which are reflected in the behavior of its manifestations.

Some researchers have looked to the past and developed theories of intervention by the phenomenon in past human civilizations. Some of these researchers have been far out on the fringe, and much of this work has been discredited by archaeologists (for instance, Von Daniken), but it still remains an intriguing and open question. Many point to the work of Sitchin as demonstrating the presence of such effects, while others look to the writings of Brinsley Le Poer Trench.

And there are those who believe that the UFO phenomenon cannot be understood solely or perhaps even at all, with the means of science. Such individuals often are associated with activities such as channelling, or are closely allied with mystical beliefs and sects. In light of the recent Heaven's Gate tragedy, it is clear that one must be very careful when dealing with this area.

The UFO provides sufficiently varied manifestations that certain researchers have specialized in specific types of manifestations. Crash retrievals, abductions, crop circles, and many other areas, both central and peripheral to the UFO phenomenon, occupy their efforts.

A survey of the theories of the UFO phenomenon would be incomplete without a discussion of conspiracies. A commonly accepted ground is that many UFO reports taken at face value appear to be of great potential defense significance to governments. In the US, the government has documented incidents of UFOs violating military and restricted airspace, making close approaches to sensitive areas such as nuclear weapon storage and deployment facilities, and even interfering with defense installations or military aircraft. Documents have been obtained from the US government via the Freedom of Information Act, and are clearly representative of what the government believes to have been actual events. In the late 1980s, the close approach of a UFO to the US / UK air bases near Rendlesham forest led to an alert and investigation by base personnel. In the 1990s, Belgian airspace was violated several times by large triangular objects with incredible performance, whose activities were observed visually, by ground and airborne radar - and intercepts were (unsuccessfully) attempted. The famous destruction of a Korean Air Line 747 passenger aircraft followed close on the heels of a dramatic UFO observation, with radar tracking, by Russian military personnel. US State Department files document the attempted intercept of a UFO by Iranian personnel, who were dissuaded by physical effects that disabled their instruments and weapon systems.

Obviously, a government which received such reports would be remiss in not maintaining research on the phenomenon - on this, even the most conservative researchers seem to agree. When approached on these matters, most governments demonstrate an evasiveness that resembles what would be encountered if making inquiries concerning the disposition of nuclear weapons or aircraft carriers.

Based on this, some researchers have assumed that governments have knowledge of the phenomenon which they are unwilling to make public. Some even go so far as to claim that governments must know what the phenomenon is, or that governments have in their possession remains of occupants and objects, and even that governments are working to back-engineer technology from recovered UFO material. Unfortunately, what evidence exists for these claims is circumstantial, and has never been verified to the level that would be required to give them full credence.

While the nature of the UFO remains a subject for speculation, and, perhaps, eventually, direct scientific testing, one thing is clear - the UFO phenomenon exists, reliable persons see and report UFOs, and the solution to this mystery is vitally needed.

If you would be interested in being part of that solution, contact MUFON.
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/mufonct/summary.htm

[dhatz]

Με την ευκαιρία των 20 χρόνων απο το συμβάν με το τεράστιο UFO στην πτήση JAL1628 τον Δεκ-1980, ο ιαπωνικός Τύπος είχε ρεπορτάζ για το περιστατικό (βέβαια, δεν γίνεται αναφορά στα radar data που ήρθαν μόλις το 2001 απο τον Callahan της Υπηρεσίας Πολιτικής Αεροπορίας των ΗΠΑ για να επιβεβαιώσουν ότι τα 3 μέλη στο κοκπιτ του JumboJet δεν έβλεπαν ..."πουλάκια" ειτε την ... Αφροδίτη και τον Άρη που ελεγε ο ανεκδιήγητος Klass)

Source: Japan Today - Tokyo
http://www.japantoday.com/jp/kuchikomi/443
December 8, 2006

JAL Pilot's UFO Story Surfaces After 20 Years

One December evening in 1986, reports Shukan Shincho (Dec 7),
two Kyodo News journalists presented themselves by appointment
at the London hotel room of JAL pilot by the name of Terauchi.
He had a story for them =96 but should he be telling it? Should
they be listening? Are UFOs serious?

Journalism is a skeptical trade, and as for pilots, even if they
do spot strange lights, objects and movements in the sky for
which they can conceive no other explanation, they are expected
to keep their suspicions to themselves. Their livelihood depends
on passengers' confidence. Talk of UFOs does not encourage it.

So Terauchi, in granting the interview, was stepping out on a
limb. He later paid the price.

On Nov 17, 1986, he told the Kyodo journalists, he was chief
pilot on JAL flight 1628, Narita-bound from Paris. The first
stop was Keflavik, Iceland; the second, Anchorage, Alaska. At
5:10 p.m. local time the plane, a Boeing-747 jumbo, was flying
10,600 meters over Alaska. It was dusk, not quite dark.

"Suddenly," Terauchi said, "600 meters below, I saw what looked
like two belts of light. I checked with the Anchorage control
tower. They said nothing was showing on their radar."

But something was emitting those lights, and whatever it was
seemed interested in the jumbo, for it adjusted its speed to
match to match the plane's =96 "like they were toying with us,"
said Terauchi.

That went on for seven minutes or so. "Then there was a kind of
reverse thrust, and the lights became dazzlingly bright. Our
cockpit lit up. The thing was flying as if there was no such
thing as gravity. It sped up, then stopped, then flew at our
speed, in our direction, so that to us it looked like it was
standing still. The next instant it changed course. There's no
way a jumbo could fly like that. If we tried, it'd break apart
in mid-air. In other words, the flying object had overcome
gravity."

Five minutes later, the object vanished in the gathering
darkness, but soon another, much larger object, "several tens of
times larger than a jumbo jet," which itself is some 70 meters
long, appeared, bathed in blue light. Again the control tower
radar registered nothing. Terauchi noticed unusual silhouettes
over Fairbanks, Alaska. The object vanished. The jumbo landed at
6:24 p.m. and the passengers disembarked, not so much as
suspecting what a harrowing experience their pilot had been
through.

What to make of this? It's tempting to say Terauchi's
imagination got the better of him; but he's an ex-fighter pilot
with more than 10,000 flying hours under his belt. He would
know, if anyone would, how to keep his imagination in check.
Another theory Shukan Shincho hears is that the lights the pilot
saw were from Jupiter and Mars, which in fact would have been
visible on the jumbo's flight path on the night in question.
It's possible, but again =96 would a man with Terauchi's
experience and training be so easily fooled?

There are other possibilities, among them a secret U.S. military
operation or development, about which nothing is known precisely
because it is secret. Or maybe it really was what Terauchi says
it was =96 a UFO. In any case, Terauchi was shortly afterwards
grounded by JAL for talking to the press. He was given a desk
job, and only reinstated as a pilot years afterwards. Now 67 and
retired, he lives quietly with his wife in a small town in north
Kanto, and talks about the adventure as little as possible.

"I spoke to a doctor =96 he said it was an illusion," he tells
Shukan Shincho. "You saw something you weren't meant to see,"
his wife says consolingly. That, if nothing else, seems certain.

[dhatz]

Αντιγράφω αυτούσια συνέντευξη του Jim Penniston σχετικά με το περιστατικό στο Bentwaters (Rendlesham forest), οπου περιγράφει με δικά του λόγια την "επαφή" του με το τριγωνικό UFO τον Δεκ-1980 (διπλα του στα 5 μέτρα ήταν αλλος ένας), το οποίο σχεδίασε. Επίσης τράβηξε κι ένα ολόκληρο φιλμ, 36 φωτό (οι οποίες προφανώς είναι στο Αρχείο της Πολ.Αεροπορίας των ΗΠΑ και δεν εχουν δημοσιοποιηθεί).

Original σκίτσο του UFO οπως το σχεδίασε στην αναφορά του το 1980
http://www.nickpope.net/images/UFO%20Sketch.jpg

Και τα "συμβολα" πάνω στο UFO (οπως τα αντέγραψε στο μπλοκάκι και τα ξανασχεδίασε μετά)
http://www.nickpope.net/images/UFO%20Symbols.jpg

Πηγη: Το website του Nick Pope που ήταν υπεύθυνος του UFO Project της Βρετανίας http://www.nickpope.net/photo.htm

Στο debriefing του εκαναν ένεση Sodium Pentothal ("ορο της αλήθειας") και ύπνωση. Λεει και τη δική του ερμηνεία της προέλευσης του UFO: χρονο-ταξιδιώτες και ως λόγο "επίσκεψής" τους, την "λήψη γενετικού υλικού", τον οποίο δεν μπορώ να πιστέψω, τη στιγμή που ήδη σήμερα εμείς μπορούμε να κόβουμε-ράβουμε το DNA (με πρωτεϊνες), ποσο μάλλον ένας προηγμένος πολιτισμός.

FWIW

Συνεντευξη Penniston το 2002:
Twenty-two years ago on December 26, 1980, U. S. Air Force Staff
Sergeant James Penniston was stationed in the 81st Security
Police Squadron at the large joint British and U. S. Air Force
base known as RAF (Royal Air Force) Bentwaters and its smaller,
secondary base at Woodbridge, about three miles away, where some
aircraft were kept. Not long after midnight on December 26, Sgt.
Penniston was asked to investigate odd lights seen moving in the
Rendlesham forest between Bentwaters and Woodbridge. Joining him
was USAF Airman First Class John Burroughs and several other
security and military personnel. (read more)

As the security men approached the odd lights about 300 meters
off the main access road in the trees, the men could see blue,
yellow, red and white colors were pulsing.


Provided below is a complete interview with that witness:

Jim Penniston, Former USAF Staff Sergeant, 81st Security Police
Squadron, Joint USAF and RAF Bentwaters/Woodbridge, England Air
Force Base: "As we got closer, a silhouette of an object was
present and I realized at that point, it was not a conventional
aircraft, meaning it was not one that was published in Jane's
Defence book about aircraft. It was like no aircraft that I had
ever seen.

WHAT WAS THE SHAPE?

Triangular.

WHEN YOU SAY TRIANGULAR, WAS IT ABSOLUTELY STRAIGHT ON THREE
SIDES? OR WAS IT SWOOPY LIKE A CORVETTE? OR?

No, no, it was triangular, straight on each side.

[Sketch of triangular craft by USAF Staff Sergeant, Jim
Penniston, from his December 26, 1980 investigation notes made
after midnight while examining the glowing craft of unknown
origin in the Rendlesham forest near the joint RAF and USAF
Bentwaters AFB in Woodbridge, England.]

IN TERMS OF WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS MADE OUT OF?

Well, I couldn't tell at that point, but obviously I set the
other airmen up to complete the radio relay because we were
having awful bad static on the radios. I could barely talk to
the first patrolman that I had set by the logging road. I could
barely hear him. I could not hear our control center at all.

Anyway, as I got closer to it, it was -- I tell you what -- I do
have my notes from that night in my notebook. And it's probably
best to just read it out of there.

I had my notebook and my camera while I was out there because
cameras were carried because of terrorism to take pictures of
base encroachments. And it says what I wrote that night:
'Triangular in shape. The top portion is producing mainly white
light which encompasses most of the upper section of the craft.
A small amount of white light is appearing from what appears to
be the bottom of the craft. At the left side is a bluish light.
And on the other side is red. The lights seem to be molded as
part of the exterior of the structure.'

THE LIGHTS SEEM TO BE MOLDED AS ...

Part of the exterior of the structure." You got to remember,
that's the way I wrote it that night. It might not make sense in
the sentence structure. The light seemed to be molded as if part
of the exterior of the structure, smooth, slowly fading into the
rest of the outside of the structure, gradually molding into the
fabric of the craft."

Then at that time, I started taking photos. I think there were
36 in a roll. They were all B & W, that's what we carried.

WHERE DID THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS GO?

Base photo lab.

AND THE BASE PHOTO LAB PHOTOS WOULD BE IN WHOSE HANDS TODAY?

U. S. Air Force.

AND THEY WERE NOT RELEASED IN THIS RENDLESHAM FILE.

No.

SO, IT'S NOT A COMPLETE FILE RELEASE?

Oh, no. What the British knew of this incident I would say is
probably 10% of what happened. The other 90% is through U. S.
channels. It would be primarily -- the way to report it -- would
be through USAF channels to 3rd Air Force to MAJCOM Major Air
Command, which would have been at Ramstein AFB. Then Ramstein
has procedures reporting to JCS in the United States.

AND THAT'S THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF (IN WASHINGTON, D.C.
PENTAGON.)

Correct. And that's the reporting procedures for anything. It
could be for aircraft crashes or just if we have a security
situation. That would be the reporting path it would take.

SO, YOU TOOK PHOTOGRAPHS -- AT LEAST 36 IN BLACK AND WHITE -- OF
THIS TRIANGLE IN WHICH LIGHT SEEMS TO BE PART OF ITS STRUCTURE.
THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE IN A FILE SOMEWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT. WHAT ELSE HAPPENED BEYOND PHOTOGRAPHING?

Well, on the night in question with me -- I did a full
investigation of the downed craft. I mean I did a 360 degree
walk around it. It was on the ground approximately 45 minutes.

DID YOU TOUCH IT?

Yes, as part of the investigation. The size of it was
approximately 3 meters wide by 3 meters tall -- that's
approximately 9 feet.

AND WHAT CAN YOU SAY ABOUT THE SURFACE THAT YOU TOUCHED?

Well, I think the fabric or the shell was -- I guess the best
description would be a very smooth opaque, like black glass.
Even though at a distance, it appeared metallic. It made no
sense, once I was up there (close to it) that it was more like
black glass. I'm not sure -- I was pretty confused at that point.

WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS A FEW YEARS AGO, YOU REMEMBERED, I
THINK, SEEING SOME KIND OF SYMBOLS?

Yes, that is probably the most interesting part of it. I did
draw them into my notebook. That was part of the 360 (degree
examination) we were doing on the investigation because it was
not a downed aircraft at that point, but we knew we had
something out of the ordinary. You don't mind if I look at my
notes, do you? 'On this smooth exterior shell, there is writing
of some kind. I'm not sure what it is. Size 3-inch lettering.
May be symbols that stretch for a length of 2 feet. Maybe a
little more.'

The feeling after I touched these symbols, I would describe them
as like etched or engraved, like a diamond cut on glass. That
was the feeling of these. I guess etching would be the best way
to describe it.

SO THE SYMBOLS WERE CUT INTO THE SURFACE, NOT RAISED FROM THE
SURFACE?

Right, it was not paint or anything like that. One was
triangular. That was in the center. That had three circles
around it, or rather, circular objects (two small solid black
circles and triangle all inside a circumscribing circle).

Symbols engraved into the dark, glassy surface of the triangular
craft, re-drawn from his original December 26, 1980 USAF notes
at the Rendlesham forest site by Jim Penniston.

WHEN YOU TOUCHED THESE SYMBOLS WITH YOUR HAND, DID YOU GET ANY
IMAGES IN YOUR MIND?

No. But I did have a sensation. The fabric of the craft was
warmer than the air temperature. The air temperature that night
was around 31 or 32 Fahrenheit. The craft was quite a bit
warmer.

AND YOU COULD FEEL THAT WITH YOUR HANDS?

Oh, yes.

WHEN YOU TOUCHED THE SURFACE, WAS THERE ANY REACTION FROM THE
CRAFT ITSELF IN ANY WAY?

Well, I had no problem going around the craft and doing the 360-
degree looking at it. But after I did touch the actual symbols
and that on the exterior of the craft, that's when it started to
-- I backed away. I backed away from it because the light was
starting to get brighter. There still was absolutely no sound.
That is probably the most incredible part of this. There was
absolutely no sound from this craft.

WHICH COLOR LIGHT GOT BRIGHTER, WHITE, RED, OR?

White. You know, there is no doubt that the craft was
mechanical, or ship or whatever you want to call it. But there
is also no doubt in my mind that it was under intelligent
control because the craft lifted off the ground.

At that point, I thought it was on fixed legs, the craft. But
when it lifted off the ground, there was no legs on it, so I
don't know how it was sitting on the ground. It lifted up a few
feet, sort of went through the woods maybe 25 or 30 meters,
hovered momentarily, then lifted up to about 250 feet above the
top of the trees and then it was literally in the blink of an
eye, gone at that point.

YOU ARE ALL STANDING THERE AND DO WHAT NEXT?

Well, I turned to my partner there and said, 'How are you going
to explain this?' And that was pretty much -- we were trying to
absorb what we had just seen. It was most unusual.

WHO WAS WITH YOU?

The patrolman who was with me was John Burroughs. He has worked
the law enforcement side. In fact, he had worked directly for
Bud Stefans, but he was one of the guys who went out there with
me.

SO, IS HE THE ONLY ONE WITH YOU?

Well, immediately next to me at 10 feet, yes. We, of course, we
had another one back about 100 meters and there were others back
at a logging road. Of course, there were several people at the
East Gate. And all of this was observed from Bentwaters, too.

YOU HAVE ALWAYS BEEN CONSISTENT ON THE EARLY MORNING OF DECEMBER
26 AS YOUR AND JOHN BURROUGHS' ENCOUNTER WITH THE CRAFT.

And the only reason I know that for sure is because it was
Boxing Day. Christmas was over, it was the day after Christmas.

YOU AND JOHN BURROUGHS FILED A REPORT ABOUT EXACTLY WHAT
HAPPENED THEN?

Yeah, we kept a very sanitized -- we reported it to our Security
Shift Commander, I think it was Captain Mike Verrano at the
time. And we were assured by then the senior officer at
Bentwaters that this information would not go outside the United
States channels.

DID YOU UNDERSTAND AT THE TIME WHY THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A
PROBLEM IF PEOPLE WOULD JUST HAVE SAID WHAT HAPPENED PUBLICLY?

I did ask specifically that of Col. Halt. And his response was
pretty much, 'Well, don't worry about it. We're treating it as
TOP SECRET information right now.'

So, when he said that to me, that tells me that it's not going
to leave U. S. channels.

DID YOU SAY TO COL. HALT, 'I SAW IT. IT WAS TRIANGULAR. IT
SEEMED TO BE MADE...?

Oh, he was fully briefed.

DID HE SAY TO YOU AND YOU SAY TO HIM, 'WE'RE DEALING WITH AN
EXTRATERRESTRIAL CRAFT HERE?'

No. No. We are dealing with a craft of unknown origin. We had a
lot of questions and no answers. Why, how can a craft take off
with no sound? How can it have this type of appearance? How can
it emit heat without fire or anything like that? We had a lot of
questions.

BUT YOU DIDN'T DISCUSS ENTITIES?

No, never."

--

"Entities" Described in MOD Rendlesham File

Yet, "entities" are described in the November 29, 2002 release
of the Rendlesham file by the British Ministry of Defence as
shown in the following memo in which the date, address and
writer are blacked out:


English Ministry of Defence Memo that references "several
entities near RAF Bentwaters on the night of December 29/30
1980." Jim Penniston knew there was at least one other incident
in which U. S. Air Force Lt. Colonel Charles Halt was involved.
It's also possible that several incidents happened over a series
of nights. Further, intelligence agents often deliberately
scramble dates to confound investigators.



September 10, 1994 - Jim Penniston Tried Hypnosis To Remember
More

DS8 referenced in the last paragraph of the MOD Memo is a
reference Jim Penniston overheard at the U. S. Air Force Office
of Special Investigations (AFOSI), Bentwaters, when he was asked
to report for further debriefing about the December 26 incident.
At the AFOSI office, agents asked Sgt. Penniston to sign a
release so he could be given Sodium Pentothal, combined with
hypnosis, that would be recorded by two tape recorders.
Penniston said he agreed "to get them off my back. They seemed a
lot happier after I signed the release."

Penniston remembered that the agents at Bentwaters had him "lay
down on a walnut table" and that a "British guy" got the needle
ready. Under hypnosis, he described receiving information from
the lights of the triangular craft about "time travelers" from
some distant future coming back to get genetic material from
earth to use as "band-aids" in a future where reproduction of
the time traveling species is failing. For excerpts from Jim
Penniston's 1994 hypnosis session to recall more details from
his interaction with the triangular craft at Bentwaters AFB,
England on December 26, 1980.

MOD Rendlesham File

Several times in the recent November 29, 2002 Ministry of
Defence Rendlesham File release, documents say that the
Bentwaters incident did not have any impact on defense concerns.

That position was challenged by one May 14, 1985 letter from an
unnamed writer to attorney David Alton in Westminster, London:
"I cannot accept Lord Trefargne's view that there is no defence
interest in this case. Unless Lt. Col. Halt was out of his mind,
there is clear evidence in his report that British air space and
territory were intruded upon by an unidentified vehicle on two
occasions in late December 1980, and no authority was able to
prevent this. If, on the other hand, Halt's report cannot be
believed, there is equally clear evidence of a serious
misjudgment of events by U. S. Air Force personnel at an
important base in British territory. Either way, the case can
hardly be without defence significance." I asked Jim Penniston
why he thought the Ministry of Defence took the position that
the Bentwaters incident had no impact on British defence
security.

Jim Penniston: "Well, their air space got violated. They weren't
fully aware of what was going on. How can a craft invade air
space that dramatically in that country without having a full
alert to all the RAF bases? I don't think they actually know. I
think there might have been one RAF base maybe recorded air
traffic or something and of course Bentwaters did. But, I think
it is an embarrassment for them that they actually had an
aircraft, or craft of some sort, land unannounced, without them
being fully aware of it. I think that is a significant defence
issue for Britain.

Here we are sitting in the year 2002 and 22 years later, and we
cannot replicate the technology that was there in Rendlesham
that night. Those are the questions we all have, the witnesses,
is how can this be?

AND BETWEEN THE END OF DECEMBER 1980 AND DECEMBER OF 2002, AS WE
ARE SPEAKING TODAY ON DECEMBER 8, YOU HAVE NEVER HAD ANYBODY SAY
TO YOU OFF THE RECORD, 'JIM, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED AT
BENTWATERS?'

No, I haven't. No one has ever done that. I have just as many
unanswered questions that you do. We would love to have an
absolute answer about what we investigated. That would make it a
lot easier for all of us.

AND YOU DO NOT HAVE...?

I do not have the answers. All I have is questions and more
questions.

AND MEMORIES?

Yes. That's the other part, too.

MEANING?

Well, you wonder how much -- with the cover-up -- I was involved
with it, too. When you start classifying stuff and you start
saying, 'We're not going to speak about this. We're following
orders.' Hey, cover-ups happen. I was involved with it, too,
unknowingly, but I was part of it. And I think that's probably
the worst part of it right now."

[dhatz]

Πρόσεξα ότι οι διάφορες εκκλησίες έχουν φροντίσει να προσαρμόσουν τις θέσεις τους στο θέμα ΕΤ, λέγοντας ότι "οι εξωγήινοι είναι πλάσματα του Θεού και όχι άγγελοι ή δαίμονες". Αρκετοί ξενοι θεολόγοι και θρησκειολόγοι εχουν αναφερθεί σχετικά (εχω κάποιες παραπομπές σε βιντεο και στη σελίδα που ετοίμασα).

Π.χ. ο Θεολόγος του Βατικανού Balducci:

Monsignor Corrado Balducci, September 2000 [Through translator]

Monsignor Balducci is a Vatican theologian and an insider close to the Pope. He has been featured on national Italian television numerous times to express that extraterrestrial contact is a real phenomenon and “not due to psychological impairment”. In this testimony he explains that not only the general populace but also highly credible, cultured, and educated people of high status are recognizing more and more that this is a real phenomenon. He goes on to speak about the extraterrestrial people as part of God’s creation and that they are not angels nor are they devils. However they are probably more spiritually evolved.

[dhatz]

Χτες βράδυ, στις 03:00 έτυχε ν'ανοίξω TV και στη ΝΕΤ είχε εκπομπή με την Αννα Δρούζα με θέμα εξωγήινους (το είχαν αναφέρει και κάποιοι άλλοι εδώ στο thread, αλλα βλέπω σπάνια TV και ήταν η πρώτη φορά που την είδα) και κάθησα μεχρι τις 04:00 που τέλειωσε.

Το βασικό πρόβλημα, οπως εγραψα πιο πάνω με τη συνέντευξη Σαντορίνη, ειναι το θέμα της ΑΚΡΙΒΕΙΑΣ των πληροφοριών που μεταδίδονται. Προφανώς λογω προσανατολισμού της TV στο ευρυ κοινό, το περιεχόμενο μιας τέτοιας εκπομπής δεν μπορεί να είναι και τεχνικό, αλλα δεν πρέπει να λεγονται και σοβαρές ανακρίβειες.

Π.χ. εδειξαν φωτογραφίες και βίντεο, πολλά απο τα οποία είναι γνωστό οτι δεν ειναι αυθεντικά οπως το *διαφημιστικό* βιντεο του Sci-Fi channel του υποτιθεμενου UFO στους διδυμους πύργους WTC με ηθοποιό και φτιαγμένο στον υπολογιστη (CGI):

http://www.rense.com/1.imagesE/happensfake.jpg

Επισης, διαπίστωσα γι'αλλη μια φορά το "σπασμένο τηλέφωνο", που προσθέτει πράγματα και αλλοιώνει την ιστορία του περιστατικου (π.χ. στο φερόμενο CE3 του Ιταλού Caponi, του οποίου 2 φωτο έδειξαν, ειπαν ότι εδωσαν επιδέσμους στον εξωγήινο που ήταν τραυματισμένος).

Παντως, άκουσα μ' ενδιαφερον τις προσωπικές μαρτυρίες, απο τις οποίες κρατησα 2, γιατί ξέρω ότι υπάρχουν ανάλογες στο εξωτερικό και συνδέονται με άλλα στοιχεία του παζλ:

1/ Ενος κυρίου ο οποίος όντας μέσα στο αυτοκίνητό του -μερα- είδε σε μικρη απόσταση μπροστά του εναν ιπτάμενο δίσκο να αιωρείται και διέκρινε "άνθρωπο" μέσα, πριν απογειωθεί.
2/ Κι ενας άλλος που -νυχτα- είδε έναν αριθμό greys (οπως τους αναγνώρισε σε μια απο τις φωτογραφίες της εκπομπής) να αποβιβάζονται.

[Garrett]

Ειναι λιγο παλια η ειδηση αλλα μου εκανε αρκετα μεγαλη εντυπωση και ειπα να το ποσταρω.
Αυτο εδω (http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/2c21c0f98d07b010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html)

[dhatz]

Ασχετο με το βασικό μας θέμα, ομως μια ομορφη προσφατη φωτογραφία απο την κατασκευη του Διεθνους Διαστημικου Σταθμου:

"S116-E-05983 (12 Dec. 2006) --- Backdropped by a colorful Earth, astronaut Robert L. Curbeam, Jr. (left) and European Space Agency (ESA) astronaut Christer Fuglesang, both STS-116 mission specialists, participate in the mission's first of three planned sessions of extravehicular activity (EVA) as construction resumes on the International Space Station."
STS-116 Shuttle Mission Imagery (http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-116/html/s116e05983.html)

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-116/lores/s116e05983.jpg

[dhatz]

Και μια λίστα με επιστημονικές δημοσιεύσεις περισσότερο ή λιγότερο σχετικές με το θέμα μας (τα links προς abstract και πληρες κειμενο της καθε δημοσιευσης, βρισκονται στη σελίδα που ετοίμασα στο http://www.hyper.net/ufo.html ):

Dyson, Freeman J. (1960) Search for Artificial Stellar Sources of Infrared Radiation
Hart, Michael H. (1975) Explanation for the Absence of Extraterrestrials on Earth
Dyson, Freeman J. (1979) Time without end: Physics and biology in an open universe
Tipler, F. J. (1980) Extraterrestrial intelligent beings do not exist
Brin, G. D. (1983) The Great Silence - the Controversy Concerning Extraterrestrial Intelligent Life
Drake, F. D. (1985) A comparative analysis of space colonization enterprises
Papagiannis, M. D. (1985) An infrared search in our solar system as part of a more flexible search strategy
Wesson, Paul S. (1990) Cosmology, extraterrestrial intelligence, and a resolution of the Fermi-Hart paradox
Scheffer, Louis K. (1994) Machine Intelligence, the Cost of Interstellar Travel and Fermi's Paradox
Falk, D. (1995) Brain Evolution in Dolphins, Humans and Other Mammals: Implications for ETI
Oro, J. (1995) The Chemical and Biological Basis of Intelligent Terrestrial Life from an Evolutionary Perspective
Arkhipov, A. (1995) A Search for Alien Artifacts on the Moon
Ashkenazi, M. (1995) Will ETI Be Space Explorers? Some Cultural Considerations Abstract Paper
Klein, H.; Farmer, J. (1995) Status of the Search for Life on Mars
Steel, D. (1995) SETA and 1991 VG
Weiler, H. (1996) The probability of 1991 VG
Steel, D. (1998) The Fermi paradox and 1991 VG
Livio, Mariov (1999) How Rare Are Extraterrestrial Civilizations, and When Did They Emerge?
James Annis (1999) An Astrophysical Explanation for the Great Silence
Vladimir A. Lefebvre, Yuri N. Efremov (2000) Cosmic Intelligence and Black Holes
Musso, Paolo (2001) On the last terms of Drake Equation: the problem of energy sources and the "Rare Earth Hypothesis"
Godfrey Louis, A. Santhosh Kumar (2003) Cometary panspermia explains the red rain of Kerala
Horvath J. E. (2003) On gamma-ray bursts and their biological effects :a case for an extrinsic trigger of the Cambrian explosion ?
Beatriz Gato-Rivera (2003) Brane Worlds, the Subanthropic Principle and the Undetectability Conjecture
Hoyle, F.; Whickramasinghe, C. (2003) Astronomy or biology?

[dhatz]

Και μια γελοιογραφία, (βλ. σχετικά το τριγωνικό UFO και τα "ιερογλυφικά") που έστειλα πιο πάνω:

http://www.nickpope.net/images/UFO_SKYNET.jpg

[YiannisM]

Κι ένα φαινόμενο της φύσης (χωρίς εξωγήινους)...

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0612/analemma2004_ayiomamitis.jpg

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ :)

[Xguru]

Ένα quote του Richard Feynam σχετικά με τους ιπταμένους δίσκους που μου άρεσε:

"I think that it is much more likely that the reports of flying saucers are the results of the known irrational characteristics of terrestrial intelligence than of the unknown rational efforts of extra-terrestrial intelligence."

[dhatz]

Ένα quote του Richard Feynam σχετικά με τους ιπταμένους δίσκους που μου άρεσε:

"I think that it is much more likely that the reports of flying saucers are the results of the known irrational characteristics of terrestrial intelligence than of the unknown rational efforts of extra-terrestrial intelligence."

Προφανώς αναφέρεσαι στον Feynman (προφέρεται φάιν-μαν), τον γνωστό Φυσικό.

Εχω τις εξης παρατηρήσεις:

Το παραπάνω σχόλιο είναι παράφραση από κάποιο σχόλιο του σε εκπομπή του BBC το 1965, το οποίο ολόκληρο έχει ως εξης:

Some years ago I had a conversation with a layman about flying saucers — because I am scientific I know all about flying saucers! I said "I don't think there are flying saucers'. So my antagonist said, "Is it impossible that there are flying saucers? Can you prove that it's impossible?" "No", I said, "I can't prove it's impossible. It's just very unlikely". At that he said, "You are very unscientific. If you can't prove it impossible then how can you say that it's unlikely?" But that is the way that is scientific. It is scientific only to say what is more likely and what less likely, and not to be proving all the time the possible and impossible. To define what I mean, I might have said to him, "Listen, I mean that from my knowledge of the world that I see around me, I think that it is much more likely that the reports of flying saucers are the results of the known irrational characteristics of terrestrial intelligence than of the unknown rational efforts of extra-terrestrial intelligence." It is just more likely. That is all.

Κι έχει κάνει κάποιο ακόμα σχόλιο στο θέμα το 1963.


"If we come to the case of flying saucers, for example, we have the difficulty that almost everybody who observes flying saucers sees something different, unless they were previously informed of what they were supposed to see. So the history of flying saucers consists of orange balls of light, blue spheres which bounce on the floor, gray fogs which disappear, gossamer-like streams which evaporate into the thin air, tin, round flat things out of which objects come with funny shapes that are something like a human being."

Λεει πως ο καθενας βλεπει κατι διαφορετικό UFO: μπλε σφαίρες, γκρι ομίχλες κλπ. Με βάση όσα ξέρουμε σήμερα και τα παραδείγματα του thread, μπορούμε να το δεχτούμε ή να υποθέσουμε οτι δεν γνωρίζει το θέμα?

Σχετική συζήτηση στο http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-38263.html που έχει ενδιαφέρον να τη διαβάσει κανείς.

Επισης, πρεπει να βάζουμε καθετι in-context. Ειναι δηλώσεις του 1963 και 1965. Τοτε, υπήρχε η "τρέλλα" των contactees, τα raw data ήταν διάσπαρτα, δεν υπήρχε Ιντερνετ, οι πραγματικές μελέτες οπως το BlueBook Special Report 14 παρέμεναν κρυφές και ήδη απο 10 χρόνια πριν, το 1953, ήταν σε πλήρη εφαρμογή οι ψυχολογικές επιχειρήσεις του Robertson Panel/CIA για τον ευτελισμό της υπόθεσης κι οσων ασχολουνταν.

Να θυμίσω ότι ως κι ο J. Allen Hynek, ο βασικός επιστημονικός σύμβουλος του BlueBook και μετέπειτα ιδρυτής του Center for UFO Studies κι απο τους μεγαλύτερους υπέρμαχους της υπαρξης των UFO και της επιστημονικής μελέτης τους ως το τέλος της ζωής του, έβγαζε την περίοδο εκείνη "εξηγήσεις" οπως το περίφημο "swamp gas", που εμεινε κλασσικη κοροιδευτική ατάκα για τους οπαδούς της Επίπεδης Γης (βλ. την ταινία "Men in black").

Το δικό μου γενικό συμπέρασμα (όχι μόνο στη συγκεκριμένη περίπτωση) είναι ότι κατα τ'άλλα έξυπνοι και καταρτισμένοι άνθρωποι έχουν διατυπώσει χαζές απόψεις για θέματα τα οποία δεν γνωρίζουν. Προσωπικά ΟΠΟΙΟΣ και να είναι αυτός που εκφέρει μια άποψη, ειτε ειναι ο Αινστάϊν ειτε ο Γκρινσπαν ειτε ο Προεδρος της Κομισιον είτε ο Πάπας, θα μπω στον κόπο να δω ΠΟΥ το στηρίζει.

ΠΩΣ ΤΟ ΔΙΚΑΙΟΛΟΓΕΙ π.χ., ο Αστρονόμος Δοκτωρ Donald Menzel αν δεν ήταν "επώνυμοι" και μεχρι 3 ατομα τους έβγαζε τρελλούς ή/και απατεώνες. Αν ηταν παραπάνω μάρτυρες έβλεπαν την "Αφροδιτη", το φεγγάρι και σε πιο extreme περιπτώσεις π.χ. ο Father Gill υποθετει πως ειχε αστιγματισμό κι εβλεπε σκόνη και υγρασία στις ... βλεφαρίδες του.

Ισως ειναι πιο απλό και γρηγορο είναι να τους βγάλεις ΟΛΟΥΣ τρελλούς. Γιατι αν δεχτούμε την προ 45 ετων δήλωση Feynman τοις μετρητοίς, τότε αυτομάτως λέμε πως όλοι όσοι λενε πως είδαν UFO είναι τρελλοί κι όλα τα βιντεο/φωτο/ραντάρ των τελευταίων 50 ετών κατασκευασμένα.

Οποιος δέχεται τετοιον συνδυασμό "Οργουελ 1987" και "The emperor's new clothes" μεγειά και χαρά του.

[Xguru]

Η αναφορά ήταν στο Richard Feynman (τυπογραφικό, το σκότωσα το όνομα του) όντως και προσπαθήσα να βρω κάτι σύντομο που να συμπυκνώνει τις απόψεις του έχοντας διαβάσει μια διάλεξή του για την "αντιεπιστημονική" εποχή που διένυε το 1963-βιβλίο "Το νόημα των πραγμάτων".

Παρ΄όλα αυτά οι απόψεις του είναι λογικότατες και τις παραθέτω με δικά μου λόγια: Κατ΄αρχήν παραδέχεται ότι είναι πολύ πιθανόν να υπάρχουν εξωγήινοι. Σχετικά όμως με τους ιπταμένους δίσκους το γεγονός της εμφάνισης τους και της εντύπωσης που δημιούργησαν οι τελευταίοι μόνον όταν άρχισε να προοδεύει η δική μας τεχνολογία και να θεωρούμε πιθανά τα ταξίδια από το ένα μέρος στο άλλο καθώς και η μη σταθερότητα και μονιμότητα του φαινομένου των ιπταμένων δίσκων σημαίνει ότι κατά πάσα πιθανότητα δεν υπάρχει. Συνεπώς δεν αξίζει τον κόπο (και το κόστος των πειραμάτων) για να ασχοληθούν μαζί τους.



Ισως ειναι πιο απλό και γρηγορο είναι να τους βγάλεις ΟΛΟΥΣ τρελλούς. Γιατι αν δεχτούμε την προ 45 ετων δήλωση Feynman τοις μετρητοίς, τότε αυτομάτως λέμε πως όλοι όσοι λενε πως είδαν UFO είναι τρελλοί κι όλα τα βιντεο/φωτο/ραντάρ των τελευταίων 50 ετών κατασκευασμένα.


Ο διαχρονικός Feynman αυτό ακριβώς εννοεί όταν μιλάει για ανεπιστημονική εποχή, ότι το να επικαλείσαι ότι το είδαν "πολλοί"(και άλλοι τόσοι με πειραγμένα videos-photos) άρα υπάρχει είναι ανεπιστημονικό. Θέλεις να το κάνεις επιστημονικά, στήσε κάμερες, περίμενε χρόνια εξέτασε τα στοιχεία, εν πάση περιπτώση προσέγγισέ το επιστημονικά και όχι παπατζηδίστικα. Η επιστήμη δεν ασχολείται ούτως ή άλλως και απ΄ότι φαίνεται έχει τους λόγους της.

(btw ξέρεις πόσοι πολλοί έχουν δει φαντάσματα; Αυτοί στο πηγάδι κατούρησαν και δεν θεωρούμε την μαρτυρία τους τεκμήριο ύπαρξης ή μήπως τα φαντάσματα είναι μπανάλ ενώ οι ιπτάμενοι δίσκοι δένουν με το high tech της εποχής μας;) )

[dhatz]

Παλι ανακριβειες, αλλα χαριν του εορταστικού πνεύματος των ημερών θα είμαι συγκαταβατικός.

Το (προ 45-ετών) σχόλιο του Feynman ακούγεται λογικότατο μόνο στον άσχετο με το θέμα και ΜΕΧΡΙ ΝΑ ΕΞΕΤΑΣΕΙ ΤΑ ΣΤΟΙΧΕΙΑ (π.χ. το BlueBook Special Report 14 που εξέτασε 3201 περιστατικά θέασης UFO απο το 1948-1953 και σημειωτέον δεν δημοσιεύτηκε παρά δεκαετίες μετά).

Το "η επιστήμη δεν ασχολείται" ειναι λαθος και μαλιστα εστειλα συγκεκριμένα στοιχεία οπως το UFO-monitoring απο Project Hessdalen στη Νορβηγία/Ιταλία. Η Γαλλία έχει το GEPAN απο τη δεκαετία του 1950.

Το ανεπίσημο "εμπάργκο" αφορά την ΔΗΜΟΣΙΑ ακαδημαϊκή έρευνα των αγγλοσαξωνικών χωρών. Κι αυτο κατα τη γνωμη μου πολύ απλά γιατί στις ΗΠΑ υπάρχουν π.χ. τα 3 μεγάλα national labs οπου απασχολούνται πάνω απο 25.000 ατομα εκ των οποίων οι 10.000 επιστήμονες UNDER SECURITY με προυπολογισμό μεγαλύτερο απ'ολο το NSF (National Science Foundation δηλ. ΟΛΗΣ της δημόσιας ακαδημαικης ερευνας). Με δεδομένες τις στρατιωτικές εφαρμογές αυτων των τεχνολογιών (για να μη μιλήσω για οικονομικές, θρησκευτικές, κοινωνικές προεκτάσεις) θα περιμεναν 3 καθηγητές και 10 μεταπτυχιακούς να κάνουν "ακαδημαϊκή έρευνα" και να δημοσιεύσουν paper?

Οπως ευκολα μπορεί κανεις να διαπιστωσει, οι περισσότεροι physical scientists ακαδημαικοι απλά "κανουν την πάπια" με σχόλια "δεν ξέρω, δεν είδα" μέχρι να φτάσουν στη συνταξη, με λίγες εξαιρέσεις, γιατι δεν διακινδυνεύουν την χρηματοδότηση και τη δουλειά τους.

Αυτοί που εκφράζονται αρνητικά είναι ΕΛΑΧΙΣΤΟΙ και οπως ειδαμε στα προηγούμενα μηνύματα είναι ΦΙΛΟΛΟΓΟΙ (Joe Nickell), ΦΙΛΟΣΟΦΟΙ (Todd Carroll) και ΨΥΧΟΛΟΓΟΙ (Michael Shermer) που ΔΕΝ ΞΕΡΟΥΝ ΤΗΝ ΤΥΦΛΑ ΤΟΥΣ για το θέμα και μιλουν για πραγματα που δεν εχουν το γνωστικό υπόβαθρο να καταλάβουν.

Τελος, "επιστήμονική ερευνα" δεν νοείται μόνο σαν επαναλαμβανόμενα πειράματα σε ελεγχόμενες συνθήκες εργαστηρίου, αλλά και μελέτη γεγονότων που δεν μπορούμε να τα "ξανατρέξουμε" κατα βουληση, π.χ. το ατυχημα του διαστημικου λεωφορίου.

[dhatz]

Ο Dr. Peter A. Sturrock (που είναι διακεκριμένος ακαδημαϊκός, Professor of Space Science and Astrophysics and Deputy Director of the Center for Space Sciences and Astrophysics at Stanford University; Director of the Skylab Workshop on Solar Flares in 1977) σχετικά με το θέμα της επιστημονικής ερευνας των UFO


"The definitive resolution of the UFO enigma will not come about unless and until the problem is subjected to open and extensive scientific study by the normal procedures of established science. This requires a change in attitude primarily on the part of scientists and administrators in universities." (Sturrock, Peter A., Report on a Survey of the American Astronomical Society concerning the UFO Phenomenon, Stanford University Report SUIPR 68IR, 1977.)

"Although... the scientific community has tended to minimize the significance of the UFO phenomenon, certain individual scientists have argued that the phenomenon is both real and significant. Such views have been presented in the Hearings of the House Committee on Science and Astronautics [and elsewhere]. It is also notable that one major national scientific society, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, set up a subcommittee in 1967 to 'gain a fresh and objective perspective on the UFO phenomenon.'

In their public statements (but not necessarily in their private statements), scientists express a generally negative attitude towards the UFO problem, and it is interesting to try to understand this attitude. Most scientists have never had the occasion to confront evidence concerning the UFO phenomenon. To a scientist, the main source of hard information (other than his own experiments' observations) is provided by the scientific journals. With rare exceptions, scientific journals do not publish reports of UFO observations. The decision not to publish is made by the editor acting on the advice of reviewers. This process is self-reinforcing: the apparent lack of data confirms the view that there is nothing to the UFO phenomenon, and this view works against the presentation of relevant data." (Sturrock, Peter A., "An Analysis of the Condon Report on the Colorado UFO Project," Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1987.)

Σημ: Προσφατα ο Sturrock ανακοίνωσε ότι το SCIENCE συμφώνησε να δημοσιεύει "well penned" papers on UFOs.

[Xguru]

Το (προ 45-ετών) σχόλιο του Feynman ακούγεται λογικότατο μόνο στον άσχετο με το θέμα και ΜΕΧΡΙ ΝΑ ΕΞΕΤΑΣΕΙ ΤΑ ΣΤΟΙΧΕΙΑ (π.χ. το BlueBook Special Report 14 που εξέτασε 3201 περιστατικά θέασης UFO απο το 1948-1953 και σημειωτέον δεν δημοσιεύτηκε παρά δεκαετίες μετά).


3201 θεάσεις γενικά (μπαλονιών, αεροπλάνων, πουλιών, συννέφων κλπ.) και όχι UFOs, απ τα οποία μικρό ποσοστό ταξινομήθηκε ως unknown και απ΄ αυτά υπήρχε η έλλειψη κοινού pattern. Δεν έχω χρόνο αυτή τη στιγμή να το διαβάσω ολόκληρο αναλυτικά (εξάλλου είναι κουράστικο και μη επιστημονικά γραμμένο) αν και από μια γρήγορη ματιά το μοναδικό επιστημονικό τεκμήριο που επικαλείσαι φαίνεται να σε αδειάζει στα συμπεράσματά του.

[dhatz]

3201 θεάσεις γενικά (μπαλονιών, αεροπλάνων, πουλιών, συννέφων κλπ.) και όχι UFOs, απ τα οποία μικρό ποσοστό ταξινομήθηκε ως unknown και απ΄ αυτά υπήρχε η έλλειψη κοινού pattern. Δεν έχω χρόνο αυτή τη στιγμή να το διαβάσω ολόκληρο αναλυτικά (εξάλλου είναι κουράστικο και μη επιστημονικά γραμμένο) αν και από μια γρήγορη ματιά το μοναδικό επιστημονικό τεκμήριο που επικαλείσαι φαίνεται να σε αδειάζει στα συμπεράσματά του.

Κατ'αρχήν, το σχολιο σου "μικρό ποσοστό που ταξινομήθηκε ως unknown" δείχνει οτι ακόμα δεν καταλαβαίνεις οτι σε μια τέτοια μελέτη ΜΑΣ ΕΝΔΙΑΦΕΡΕΙ ΤΟ *ΣΗΜΑ* ΚΙ ΟΧΙ Ο ΘΟΡΥΒΟΣ (που μπορει να ειναι περισσότερος η λιγοτερος κι εξαρταται απο το δειγμα)!

Αν θέλω να φτιάξω ομάδα μπάσκετ, δεν θα πω "υπάρχουν Χ εκατομμύρια Έλληνες που είναι κάτω απο 2μ ύψος", αφου μ'ενδιαφέρουν οι λίγες χιλιάδες, το 1% του πληθυσμου που είναι πανω απο 2μ.

Αν θέλω να βρω φάρμακο για την Χ ασθένεια, δεν θα πω "υπάρχουν 1 δις ligands - υδατοδιαλυτά μόρια που ΔΕΝ ειναι π.χ. protein inhibitors" και ΔΕΝ κανουν για φάρμακο, μ'ενδιαφέρει το ΕΣΤΩ ΚΙ ΕΝΑ που ΕΙΝΑΙ, που κάνει τη δουλειά και θεραπευει τον αρρωστο.

Αν θέλω να βρω πραγματικά UFO, δεν θα πω οτι "βρηκα και τοσα περιστατικα με μπαλόινια ή την Αφροδίτη", αφου μ'ενδιαφέρουν τα πραγματικά ανεξήγητα περιστατικά.

ΞΑΝΑ, μας ενδιαφέρει το ΣΗΜΑ κι όχι ο θόρυβος!

Το πολυ σημαντικό που μας λέει το BlueBook SR 14 είναι ότι τα "unknowns" ΔΕΝ ηταν λογω έλλειψης στοιχείων, ισα-ισα που όσο καλύτερο quality (παρατηρηση απο αποσταση αναπνοής, περισσότερες λεπτομέρειες, περισσότερους και πιο αξιοπιστους μαρτυρες κλπ) ειχε ενα περιστατικο, τοσο πιο πιθανό να ειναι "ανεξήγητο" δηλ ΠΡΑΓΜΑΤΙΚΟ UFO. Και στο SR14 unknowns ήταν το 21.5% των περιπτώσεων, 689 στα 3201 περιστατικά!

Ανεφερα το BlueBook Special Report 14, που εκπονήθηκε απο το Battelle Memorial Institute (που το βάφτισες και "μη επιστημονικό" !!!) γιατι ήταν η μόνη quanitative analysis που πραγματοποιήθηκε σε "επίσημα" data και περιλαμβανει κυρίως την περίοδο πριν το 1952, οταν
1/ αφενός βγήκε κοινή διαταγή #146 Στρατου / Ναυτικου / Αεροπορίας με την οποία όλα τα "ζουμερά" περιστατικά UFO διερευνουνταν απο την 4602AISS και μετα το 1953 στο BlueBook εμεναν μονο τα ... μπαλόνια και
2/ πριν αρχίσουν οι ΨΕΠ της CIA (βλ. Robertson Panel 1952) για το εξευτελισμό της υπόθεσης ("ο βασιλιάς φοράει υπέροχα ρούχα, κι όποιος τον βλέπει γυμνό είναι τρελλός").

Τωρα για το αν υπάρχει η οχι pattern, ακομα και απο τα ελάχιστα περιστατικά που αναφέραμε εδώ σαν το μικρό τριγωνικό UFO νομίζω ότι ειναι προφανές (και υπάρχουν πολύ καλές πρόσφατες databases).

[Xguru]

Κάτσε γιατί θα με τρελλάνεις...Θεωρείς το BlueBook έγκυρο; Γιατί δεν υιοθετείς μετά τα συμπεράσματά του (ξέρεις σε τι αναφέρομαι και αν δεν ξέρεις θα στο κάνω quote); Hint:"Thus, the probability that any of the UNKNOWN...extremely small..."

Δεν θεωρείς το BlueBook έγκυρο; Γιατί μας το παρουσιάζεις σαν τη μοναδική επιστημονική προσέγγιση της οποία ο άσχετος Feynman δεν διάβασε τα αδιάσειστα στοιχεία! και το χρησιμοποιείς σαν στοιχείο; Τι κάνεις, παίρνεις λίγο από το επιστημονικό του άρθρου που δε σου κάθεται το συμπέρασμα και το διανθίζεις με την δική σου ή και των άλλων αίσθηση προβαίνοντας σε αυθαίρετα μη επιστημονικά συμπεράσματα.

Και έτσι και γιουβέτσι δεν γίνεται, ή μάλλον γίνεται, γίνεται έτσι και μετά χειραγωγείτε την πραγματικότητα και φταίνε οι μυστικές υπηρεσίες και η ντροπαλότητα των εξωγήινων οπότε γίνεται και γιουβέτσι.

Όσο για τα σήματα, τα σήματα (ενδείξεις) αποτελούν ανεπαρκέστατο τεκμήριο ύπαρξης. Αυτό και μόνο μου φτάνει για να είμαι πολύ επιφυλακτικός. Μπορώ να ερμηνεύσω ενδείξεις γεγονότων με πολλά απίθανα σενάριο και ένα από αυτά είναι και η περίπτωση των ντοπαλών εξωγήινων για τους οποίους κρύβουν τις αποδείξεις οι μυστικές υπηρεσίες.

Με την ευκαιρία, εξήγησέ μου γιατί είναι πιό πιθανό να είναι εξωγήινοι και όχι κάποια όργανα του Θεού που δημιούργησε το σύμπαν και τα στέλνει για να μας παρακολουθεί; Σου φαίνεται παράξενο; Ε λοιπόν είναι εξίσου παράξενο με τη θεωρία των εξωγήινων όσο έχουμε μόνο ενδείξεις και σήματα που μπορούν να μεταφραστούν όπως θέλει ο καθένας.

Για όσο οι UFOπληκτοι δεν έχουν αποδείξεις έχω κάθε δικαίωμα (ή το ίδιο δικαίωμα με αυτούς) να υποστήριζω ότι πρόκειται για όργανα του θεού. Η διαφορά είναι ότι εγώ δε βγαίνω με πανό στους δρόμους που γράφουν "Μετανοείτε" προσπαθώντας να τους δείξω την αλήθεια που δε βλέπουν!!, εσείς γιατί "βγαίνετε" και δεν κρατάτε τα επιστημονικοφανή φαντασιωσικά σας παραληρήματα για τους ευατούς σας περιοριζόμενοι στα σήματα και μόνο...
Κοινώς μη μιλάτε λες και έχετε αποδείξεις για θέματα για τα οποία υπάρχουν λίαν αμφισβητήσιμες και ποικιλιτρόπως μεταφραζόμενες ενδείξεις.

[blend]

Για όσο οι UFOπληκτοι δεν έχουν αποδείξεις έχω κάθε δικαίωμα (ή το ίδιο δικαίωμα με αυτούς) να υποστήριζω ότι πρόκειται για όργανα του θεού. Η διαφορά είναι ότι εγώ δε βγαίνω με πανό στους δρόμους που γράφουν "Μετανοείτε" προσπαθώντας να τους δείξω την αλήθεια που δε βλέπουν!!, εσείς γιατί "βγαίνετε" και δεν κρατάτε τα επιστημονικοφανή φαντασιωσικά σας παραληρήματα για τους ευατούς σας περιοριζόμενοι στα σήματα και μόνο...
Κοινώς μη μιλάτε λες και έχετε αποδείξεις για θέματα για τα οποία υπάρχουν λίαν αμφισβητήσιμες και ποικιλιτρόπως μεταφραζόμενες ενδείξεις.

Εχεις όλο το δικαίωμα να αμφισβητείς. Δεν έχεις όμως κανένα δικαίωμα να προσβάλλεις.

Ο συνάδελφος, παραθέτει στοιχεία και προσπαθεί να τα στηρίξει. Κάνε κι εσύ το ίδιο και κρατηθείτε και οι δυό σε κόσμιο επίπεδο.

Και αυτό ΔΕΝ είναι παράκληση, είναι απαίτηση!

[dhatz]

Λοιπόν, για να τελειώνω απο την πλευρά μου:

Το Project Blue Book ήταν ένα προγραμμα καταγραφής / παραλαβής περιστατικών θέασης UFO στην Αμερικ.Πολεμική Αεροπορία, στελεχωμένο μ'εναν ταγματάρχη, 2 φαντάρους και 2 γραμματείς. Μια βιβλιοθήκη θεάσεων δηλαδή. Και μαζευαν υλικό στο αρχείο τους. ΕΝΑ ΑΡΧΕΙΟ ΣΥΜΒΑΝΤΩΝ δηλαδή. Κι ειχαν εναν εξωτερικό συμβουλο-επιστήμονα τον καθηγ. αστρονομίας Allen Hynek.

Για λεπτομέρειες πως λειτουργουσε το BlueBook, μπορεί κανεις να διαβάσει το βιβλίο του Ruppelt που ηταν και ο ταγματαρχης επικεφαλής (εχει περάσει το copyright και υπάρχει free-download, εχω το λινκ στη σελιδα που ετοιμασα).

Αυτο το Αρχείο του BlueBook επαιρνε το Battelle Memorial Institute και του εκανε κατα περιόδους μια quantitative analysis με punch cards σε IBM Mainframe της εποχης, με τελευταία 3201 περιστατικών μεχρι το 1954, που ηταν το Special Report 14. (HINT: γιατί το σταμάτησαν τότε? γιατί οπως εγραψα πιο πάνω, μετά το 1953 στελνανε στο BlueBook μόνο τα ...μπαλόνια).

Αν τωρα με ρωτας αν δεχομαι τα "συμπεράσματα του BlueBook" εννοωντας το SPECIAL REPORT 14, αυτό που μπορεί κανεις ευκολα να διαπιστώσει ειναι ότι κάτω απο τα παραπλανητικά "συμπεράσματα" της μιας σελίδας ΠΟΥ ΔΗΜΟΣΙΕΥΤΗΚΑΝ σαν "Δελτιο Τυπου" έχεις το κυρίως σωμα της μελέτης με πίνακες με τα data που ΔΕΝ δημοσιευτηκαν παρα δεκαετίες αργότερα, που λένε ότι

1/ Το 21.5% των περιστατικών ειναι "ανεξηγητα"
2/ Τα "ανεξήγητα" δεν έχουν κοινα χαρακτηριστικα με τα "γνωστά" (για να υποθέσουμε οτι ειναι παρερμηνεία των γνωστών)
3/ Οσο καλύτερη ποιότητα (παρατηρηση απο αποσταση αναπνοής, περισσότερες λεπτομέρειες, περισσότερους και πιο αξιοπιστους μαρτυρες κλπ) ειχε ενα περιστατικο, τοσο πιο πιθανό να ειναι "ανεξήγητο"

Ειτε ακομα καλύτερα μπορει κανεις να διαβάσει τα ιδια τα περιστατικά απο τα raw αρχεια του BlueBook και να βγάλει τα συμπεράσματά του.

Στα 21 χρόνια που λειτούργησε το Project BlueBook απο το 1948 μεχρι το 1969, ειχε ΕΝΑΝ μονιμο επιστήμονικο συμβουλο, τον καθηγ. Αστρονομίας Hynek, ο οποίος αν και ξεκίνησε ως σκεπτικιστής στο τέλος πειστηκε απολυτα για την πραγματικότητα των UFO, και μαλιστα έγραψε βιβλία και μαλιστα ιδρυσε το Center for UFO Studies. Με δυο λόγια, ο καθηγ. Αστρονομίας Hynek που ΚΑΤΑ ΤΕΚΜΗΡΙΟ ασχολήθηκε απο την αρχή ως το τέλος στο Project BlueBook, που έκανε 21 χρόνια field investigation (δηλ. μιλούσε καθημερινά με τους αυτόπτες μάρτυρες απο κοντά, κι όχι "αναλύσεις του καναπέ") εγινε απο τους πιο ένθερμους υποστηρικτές. Αυτο κατι μας λεει...

[dhatz]

Για όποιον ενδιαφέρεται για λεπτομέρειες σχετικά με το Project Blue Book, υπάρχει σχετική σελίδα στην Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Blue_Book

με τις λεπτομέρειες για την πορεία του project στα 21 χρόνια που διήρκεσε (δεν την αντιγράφω γιατί είναι μεγάλη).

Συνοψίζει τα σχόλια απο τα βιβλία του Ruppelt (πρωην επικεφαλη του προγράμματος και εν συνεχεία ερευνητή μηχ/κου στη Northrop), του Hynek (επιστημονικου συμβουλου επι 21 χρόνια) και αλλων που συμμετειχαν.

Σχετικά με την quantitative analysis του BB SR14, γράφει ότι και η Γαλλική GEPAN κατέληξε σε ανάλογα συμπεράσματα:


The result of the monumental BMI study were echoed by a 1979 French GEPAN report which stated that about a quarter of over 1,600 closely studied UFO cases defied explanation, stating, in part, "These cases … pose a real question." (Randles and Houghe, 202) When GEPAN's successor SEPRA closed in 2004, 5800 cases had been analyzed, and the percentage of inexplicable unknowns had dropped to about 14%. The head of SEPRA, Dr. Jean-Jacques Velasco, found the evidence of extraterrestrial origins so convincing in these remaining unknowns, that he wrote a book about it in 2005

ΥΓ: Το BlueBook παρ'όλες τις σοβαρές αδυναμίες του, το ανέφερα απλά επειδή υπήρξε μια "επίσημη" (με "κρατική" βούλα) database απο UFO reports, αν και η μόνη περίοδος του που έχει κάποια αξία είναι επι Ruppelt το 1948-1953. Υπήρξαν πολύ καλύτερες databases στην πορεία (και λόγω της χρήσης Η/Υ που δεν υπήρχαν τη δεκαετία του 1950).

[Xguru]

Εχεις όλο το δικαίωμα να αμφισβητείς. Δεν έχεις όμως κανένα δικαίωμα να προσβάλλεις.

Ο συνάδελφος, παραθέτει στοιχεία και προσπαθεί να τα στηρίξει. Κάνε κι εσύ το ίδιο και κρατηθείτε και οι δυό σε κόσμιο επίπεδο.

Και αυτό ΔΕΝ είναι παράκληση, είναι απαίτηση!

Έχεις δίκιο παρεκτράπηκα λίγο αλλά με έπνιγε το δίκαιο...με την παράθεση στοιχείων δεν έχω πρόβλημα, με το να τα χρώματίζεις με δικές σου ερμηνείες (όχι εσύ) δίνοντας τους επιστημονικοφανή υφή(χωρίς να έχουν καμμία όμως) και να τους βγάζεις όλους άσχετους αφου υπάρχουν τα (ο Θεός να τα κάνει) αδιασειστα τεκμήρια ψιλοέχω πρόβλημα.

Ασχολήθηκα με τους εξωγήινους πιθανότατα παραπάνω απ΄όσο πρόκειται να ασχοληθούν αυτοί με εμένα για τα υπόλοιπα χρόνια, τους αφήνω να υπάρχουν και να παίζουν το "κρυφτό" τους, το ψωμί μου τρώνε άλλωστε; I rest my case

[dhatz]

Xguru, ειπα να δωσω τόπο στην οργή λόγω του πνεύματος των ημερών, αλλά μη με τσιγκλίζεις κιόλας...

Το ποιός είναι επιστημονικοφανής, ποιά σχόλια (σαν του Feynman προ 45 ετών) είναι "πολιτικάντικα" και που βρίσκεται η αλήθεια είναι προφανές νομίζω, σε όποιον μπει στον κόπο να διαβάσει έστω τις 3-4 τελευταίες σελίδες του thread.

Απλά, η όλη ιστορία με το παραμυθι "Τα καινούργια ρούχα του αυτοκράτωρα" και τις ΨΕΠ δίνει την ευκαιρία σε ορισμένους να το παίζουν "τζάμπα μάγκες"... Το ότι κοροϊδεύουν τον κόσμο κατάμουτρα μ'ενοχλεί (οπως π.χ. μ'ενοχλεί που διάφορες χώρες ανακοινώνουν στον κόσμο πληθωρισμό 1.5%-3% και όπου επίσης πάντα βρίσκουν κάποιους εν προκειμένω "επιστήμονες - οικονομολόγους" να του λένε ψέμματα with a straight face).

Με την ευκαιρία, θα συμπληρώσω τις απόψεις των στελεχών των UFO projects των διαφόρων χωρών που παρέθεσα σε προηγούμενα μηνύματα που είχαν πολύχρονη ΚΑΘΗΜΕΡΙΝΗ επαφή με το θέμα (Hynek ΗΠΑ, Wilbert Smith Καναδάς, Nick Pope Αγγλία κλπ) ΚΙ ΟΧΙ ΑΝΑΛΥΤΕΣ ΤΟΥ "ΚΑΝΑΠΕ" με την άποψη του επικεφαλής του UFO Project της Γαλλίας απο το 1983-2004, της SEPRA που υπάγεται στην CNES (τη Γαλλική NASA) φυσικου Jean-Jacques Velasco, ο οποίος ασχολήθηκε επι 27 χρόνια με το θέμα:

(η μετάφραση είναι κακή με machine-translation ομως το νόημα βγαίνει)

'Yes, UFOs exist': Position statement by SEPRA head, Jean-Jacques Velasco


[The article underneath has been published in the regional daily newspaper La Dépêche du Midi, Toulouse, France, on April 18, 2004.]

Toulouse. Jean-Jacques Velasco speaks out at last
"Yes, UFOs exist"

Jean-Jacques Velasco finally speaks without reservation about his work. And believe us, it is quite an event for all those who are interested in serious information fallen from the sky. Jean-Jacques Velasco, his name is well known in France, particularly in the Toulouse area: he is the official "Mister UFO" of the country. He has carried out 27 years a scientific investigation into each - let's say "curious" - display above our heads. Surprise, the one who was summoned, but who had been expressed little, due to obligation of discretion, states today without ambiguity in a book co-authored with Nicolas Montigiani, "UFOs... the evidence" that, yes indeed, "they" exist, and yes, "they are of extraterrestrial origin.

Jean-Jacques Velasco, optics engineer of formation, directs since 1983 within the CNES (national Center of space studies) in Toulouse, SEPRA (Service of expertise on the are atmospheric phenomena), one of the very rare structures of this type on the planet.

SEPRA, it's rock solid in the matter of competences: it benefits since its creation in 1977 (initially under the denomination of GEPAN) from the support of a high level scientific council. Forty specialists in space disciplines in the CNES brought their assistance to him. Its mission consists in inquiring on the field starting from the official statements collected up by the gendarmerie and of the military observations. On 5800 studied cases, about half reveal perfectly identifiable causes (balloons probes, natural phenomena, rockets, etc). But 13.5% escape any rational explanation. For Jean-Jacques Velasco, although it is denied by the politicians, UFOS are the demonstrations of remote intelligences. We will talk again about that.

Ο Velasco έγραψε επίσης βιβλίο για το θέμα το 2005 και μια ανοικτή επιστολή στους "σκεπτικιστές":

The following article was published in the N.29 of the "Sciences Frontières" French magazine.
OPEN LETTER TO THE SKEPTICS:
By Jean-Jacques VELASCO.

Will the light shine out someday on the question of the unidentified aerospace phenomena, the UFO, will we escape from the eternal discusses on the belief? To avoid that after a period rich in events, after the polemic around the Roswell case, I wish through this article to contribute to this debate starting from a meeting on this question which goes up with more than 20 years, and starting from my professional experience within an organization of studies and search in the field of space, the CNES. One discoursed much on the UFO, much too undoubtedly so that too many persons, at the simple evocation of this term does not react and does not think immediately of extraterrestrial or with the phantasms and others be delirious collective. It seems convenient to me, as the polemics calmed down, to speak to those who have the open mind, the curious by nature, who wish to be informed objectively, without a priori, on this subject too often loan of controversies. I want this step to be rational and pragmatic, it will undoubtedly not answer all the interrogations, nor all the expectations, it will have however the merit to tackle the question of the UFO under the single angle of the analysis of the facts. I invite the reader with this course and as so precisely said it Karl Popper, a philosopher of sciences, "there are no unworthy subjects in sciences, there are sometimes unworthy methods."

"This intimate relation with the sky played a fundamental role in the philosophical debates by creating beliefs like ways of thinking and common rules. "The field of the skies always fascinated the spirit and human curiosity by its dimension and its mystery. If the question of the UFO evokes a relationship with the sky and overall to space, it is probably that somewhere this link exists, and that it is necessary for us, failing to comprehend it, to try to seek it at least. This reference to the sky returns unceasingly, including in the past when many texts mentionned the observation of strange and mysterious phenomenon. Already the reference to the sky is permanent in the Bible, then at the gallo-roman period with the story of the burning shields which frightened the centurions, or even with the celestial wonders of the Middle Ages. During centuries, this intimate relation with the sky played a fundamental role in the philosophical debates. If the genius of Galileo, Copernic, Kepler and other Newton, had not enlightened our minds, by locating the ground and humanity in his true dimension and relation with the universe, we would be still to admit the world order according to dogmas in progress. Not so long ago, at the end of the last century, many of the astronomers of the time including the most eminent, Flammarion, Percival Lowel or Schiaparrelli, affirmed that there was life on the planet Mars. Artificial channels had been observed there, and a drawn up cartography proved that beings lived it!

Nobody doubted that and a whole popular literature, written by the best writers of the time, Jules Vernes or H.G. Wells, ignited the minds by accounts on Selenites and other Martians. It was however necessary wait the middle of the 20th century, with the Martian probes Viking in 1974 and 1975, to note that unfortunately, the planet Mars did not conceal any life on the surface and even less the presence of Martians.

Some think that today, with the techniques of monitoring of the sky and space at our disposal, optical telescopes terrestrial, radars, and more recently with true observatories in orbit as the telescope Hubble, it should not any more y have much place for mysterious or unknown phenomena. On the basis of there, it will be easier to make conceal the noises and rumors propagated on the presence of strange objects evolving/moving in the sky, with all the myths which are attached to it. In spite of that, the figures and many official documents attest it, there are always people, including experienced professionals like pilots, who observe and report observations on gleams curious or the presence about odd objects in the sky, and that even apparently accelerated since the period post-second world war!

It is indeed in 1947 that the public took note of the first modern observations of UFO brought back by qualified observers, more precisely that of a civil pilot, K. Arnold, which it first described the evolution of strange aircraft flying in formation above the Rainier mount in the sky of the Western North of the United States. Fifty years after, with the passing of time, one can legitimately wonder as the sociologist P. Lagrange about the fact of knowing if this " wave " of observation were not related to one particular period of the history, that of the cold war. With less than, for strategic and interior reasons, the American government of the time "did not invent" the "flying saucers" to create and maintain a climate psychosis among the populations. For the authorities, these stories of "flying saucers" could not be anything else than invaders coming from the East or hoaxes from illuminated like Adamski. To tell the truth, it was very difficult to form an opinion, because the reported facts often did not rest on accounts and visual testimonies, and unfortunately were only based too seldom on reliable data and objectify, photographs, recording radars, etc, which it was not possible to interpret correctly. A few years later, when the "flying saucers" were transformed into UFO, theories appeared according to which the appearances of UFO could be only the fruit of imagination, collective hallucinations, or daydreams of which reading of the fanzines or other accounts of science - fiction were the source.

Today the phenomenon UFO became in the USA a true phenomenon of company, becoming such extensive, which it does not occur a week without the topicality not seizing any and does not evoke the aspects more confusing and spectacular topic. enthusiasm that the scenario writers of Hollywood have made a big profit lately with some production like "Independence Day", "Mars Attack", or " Men in black " which put in scene, in all the situation, the report between the extraterrestrial and the human. One intends to speak about contacts and removals ("abductees") a little everywhere, and it is an even question in extreme cases of biological taking away by extraterrestrial entities. In the same way, we had right during the passage of the comet Hale Bopp, with a sect which benefitted from the occasion to carry out a collective suicide and to find the refuge eternal in the tail of comet! The journalists, the scenario writers, the advertising executives, the philosophers, the politicians, use and misuse this topic permanently, but rather curiously the scientists, more especially those of " exact " sciences, are absent.

One can put the question about such an absence? Would not be - this step that this subject is far too sulfurous and polemic and permanently polluted by an exploitation mercantile and noisy? **time-out** the director of review " The Search ", in a emission on the UFO in March 1996, reflect it not thus the opinion of scientific circles in claiming that the subject of UFO is only a pleasant entertainment, and not a question touch with field scientific... " In the same way one can note as the debate of opinion was confiscated in the United States, by the political and military authorities, while taking refuge behind sedentary considerations, this attitude making believe that these demonstrations represented a danger to the populations. To take refuge thus behind the secrecy of state also made it possible to throw discredit upon the people who wanted to make it emerge. **time-out** this have have for consequence to withdraw with citizen the right to be inform, create thus a climate of mistrust, even in certain case of paranoia, which himself be seize of group of enthusiastic which see everywhere himself install a conspiracy of silence die that it be make mention of UFO by a authority governmental unspecified. To leave this dead end, shouldn't one take a little retreat, return towards more reason and a little less passion while turning to " exact " sciences? It would be time to put the true questions, initially to know if these famous phenomena answer truly the criteria of a scientific study. The UFO would then exceed the stage of the simple ideological and sociological debate to re-enter finally in that of the scientific field. The history of sciences shows us that that is possible with the discovery of the origin of the meteorites. Before 1806, no scientific authority admitted that stones can originate in the sky! One needed an investigation, conducted by the Academy of Science, in Aigle, small locality of the department of the Orne, so that it is admitted that there were really stones which fell from the sky. Why would not be it in the same way today a few two centuries afterwards with the UFO, knowing that with the methods and average the techniques and instrumental at our disposal, we could quickly check if these phenomena really exist. Which enthralling and interesting challenge for search and knowledge, but the scientists would be they ready to raise it?

It would be false to say that the UFO never were the subject of serious scientific studies. Some thousand of work in the world whole it attest, which be very often the work of researcher or of scientist isolated, and which have give place with some publication of good level in some many field touch with discipline the more various like: propulsion, energy, human psychology, theoretical physics, etc.

Unfortunately this work, whose some of great quality, did not have the merit and the chance of beings published in scientific reviews of prestige, which in tiny room considerably the range. Some states undertook very officially, generally under cover of the armed forces, a study of the problem, to start with the United States in 1969. A scientific commission of study, on the initiative of the Air Force, was created under the direction of professor E. Condon, a physicist, and who during three years considered the subject. They are the information collected, during 30 year old meadows by the Air Force; within the framework of the "Bluebook " which was used as a basis at this committee. The commission in its conclusions " does not find interest to engage a scientific research program constant in the duration ", and this adverse opinion, a such chopper, enclosed definitively and officially closed the case in this country.

Some scientists however wanted to take up the challenge and to continue this task on a purely private or personal basis. Some of them like the professor A. Hyneck, a astronomer which be advise some USAF during more than de twenty year, call publicly into question the conclusion of this commission and militate until its death, in 1986, to provide the first foundation serious of a study scientific of phenomenon UFO. **time-out** its contribution and large merit, from a data file de données made up of several thousand of case of observation, supplement by all a series of investigation on the ground, be to show that the materiality physical of certain phenomenon be not in agreement with some demonstration natural or artificial known.

Unfortunately, the scientific community did not resume on its account its work which fell into the lapse of memory. Nevertheless a little more late, some other researcher, some engineer, physicist for the majority, such as J.M. Mc Campbell in United States, the professor A. Messeen in Belgium or C Poher, J. Valley or J.P. Small in France, have continue in this way and contribute to carry the subject on the ground scientific. In spite of that, the study of phenomenon UFO in have be reduce with marginality, the more so as the catch of position of some among them incite hardly this same community scientific to take the problem with serious. During this time, the observations continued beings announced throughout the world...

It is partly to come out of this situation, that to France in 1974, an institution, the IHEDN, decided to examine this file. Following its report/ratio, the government asked the CNES to set up a cell of permanent study of the phenomenon UFO. The GEPAN was created in May 1977 and began its first work under the cane of Claude Poher, engineer in aeronautics and space, which was at that time head of " division rocket probes ". Neither board of inquiry, nor civil or military governmental office, the GEPAN under the directives of an independent scientific consulting, accepted for mission of examining and of bringing the maximum of answers on this thorny question of the UFO.

The first stages of the work of the GEPAN consisted to define the field of study, to work out a scientific methodology and to set up the procedures and tools of intervention for the teams of investigation. In same time, the GEPAN established collaborations with the national gendarmerie, the font, the Air Force and the civil aviation to collect and process the data. Having the files and first data collected by this channel, a statistical work made it possible to work out a classification and a typology of the studied phenomena. This work confirmed the results of the Ruppelt captain, director of the ATIC within USAF, going back to 1952, like those of professor A. Hyneck on the characteristic and the physical component of certain demonstrations. These observations were in addition checked by the examination of a certain number of old cases which revealed a whole category of phenomena whose nature and characteristics physical, did not seem to be assimilable with known or identifiable events.

Within sight of these first results, the scientific consulting asked the GEPAN to concentrate its action on investigations and cases recent. Moreover, it was assigned to him to undertake more fundamental search, conduits in civil or military laboratories, for better determining certain aspects related to these demonstrations in fields such as the psychology of perception for the analysis of testimonies, or the evaluation of the influence of the processes of diffusion of information in and by the media, but also to look further into particular categories of weather phenomena such as the lightning in ball, and to engage of the more specific studies on modeling in physics like that of the magnetohydrodynamic propulsion, etc.; In 1988 the GEPAN was transformed into SEPRA, because the CNES and the scientific consulting while wishing the continuation of its activities of expertise and data acquisition, stopped those related to the studies and search more fundamental which did not answer the vocation of the establishment. Curiously during this period, few events occurred, the rare phenomena of width corresponded most of the time to atmospheric re-entries, racing cars like the meteorites or well to the artificial put into orbit objects, body of rockets, satellites, these examples fitting completely in the activity of expertise on the CNES as regards monitoring of space and the space remains. Spectacular cases were going in addition perfectly to justify the choice of this transformation.

What occurred in the evening from November the 05, 1990 will undoubtedly remain forever engraved in the memory of those having attended this strange and mysterious event. For the ones it was an immense luminous triangle and silencer which crossed during 2 minutes the sky of France of West and Is, for others funny of plane which flew over it capital! In short they are thousands of observers which remained amazed by this strange spectacle. It is more than 250 verbal lawsuits of gendarmerie and font, representing several hundreds of testimonies as well as many reports/ratios of civil pilots and soldiers in flight, who attested reality of this event. **time-out** the investigation immediately start we allow a few hour after, thanks to stepping carry out between the testimony and the data receive on behalf of NASA, to determine with precision that it himself act, without no ambiguity, of re-entry in the atmosphere of a body of rocket which have place on orbit some time before a telecommunications satellite Soviet GORIZON 21.

I would like to denounce here an error of judgment, which seems to me fundamental, and which make the majority of the commentators, this one consisting in proposing like single answer on the nature of the UFO, which those are only the fruit of the imagination of the witnesses. This too reducing approach neither was drawn aside, nor privileged in the analysis of the problem, but considered as working hypothesis and examined with the methods and tools developed by scientists in analysis of testimonies. This is why one cannot admit that there is only one answer to the question about the UFO with the only arguments resting on sociological or psychosociological considerations of nature. If the topics conveyed in the famous televised series worship X Files, which appears regularly on our small screens, were as influential and determinants as claim it the socio - psychological and the folklorists, should be permanently flooded for us testimonies. In fact it appears within sight of the some three thousand files and reports/ratios of gendarmerie of SIDE examined to the GEPAN, then with the SEPRA, that no case falls under this theoretical diagram. Just as between the phenomenon UFO and parapsychology, we did not find any link nor unspecified report/ratio. This fact I cannot that to deplore the amalgam and the confusion which generally associates with the category of the phenomena paranormaux and parapsychologic the phenomenon UFO, in addition making the treat of the dream and illusion mongers near the too credulous spirits.

The only way of clearly showing and truly with what can resemble the phenomena UFO, it is to present remarkable cases investigués by the GEPAN and the SEPRA after analysis not having received of answer on their identification. Two businesses in very different registers illustrate it clearly. The first describes what one calls a case of brought closer meeting and the second an aeronautical case visuel/radar. They correspond both to the presence of physical objects, of which characteristics and parameters were measured and recorded by an instrument, either directly or according to the " indirect effects " that they generated on the environment. Trans en Provence, the 8 February 1981 around 17 hour a man which build a small waterpump shelter, in its garden, go be pilot of what be perhaps one of case the more strange never observe and study in France. It is a reflection of the sun on something which evolved/moved in the sky which will attract its glance and will enable him to observe the descent, then the brutal landing, on a quay level below located its house, of a quiet metal object. This one of ovoid form, did not present any apparent asperity, wing, control surface or engine making it possible to compare it to an unspecified aircraft. This object will remain some urgent briefs on the platform, always by not emitting any noise, then it will take off and disappear at a speed very high in the blue sky. This account altogether rather banal could stop only with this simple visual observation, if there had been traces and mechanical prints visible which will make rock this business in the field of the unknown and the unexplained one. **time-out** the gendarmerie then the GEPAN carry out a investigation thorough during which of many maintenance with the witness, its vicinity, then the setting in work of procedure of expertise on the ground with of soil samples and of plant, follow of analysis show unambiguous that it himself act really of a object metal heavy, not identify, which himself be pose on the terrace. It is the analysis of the plants taken on the site which will indicate that we were not in the presence of a type of aircraft including known military helicopters or drones, hypotheses adopted and checked. The vegetation presents on the site of landing, the wild shape of alfalfa, was deeply marked and affected by an external agent which modified in-depth the photosynthetic apparatus of the plant. Indeed chlorophyls, but also certain amino acids of the plant presented significant variations of rate in relation to the distance. Two years afterwards, these same effects disappeared completely thus revealing a specific and particular type from traumatism.

According to the professor Mr. Bounias, some laboratory of ecology and of toxicology vegetable of INRA, which carry out the analysis, the cause of deep disturbance record on the vegetation present on this ecosystem, can probably be due with a powerful field electromagnetic, more precisely locate in the range of frequency (microwave). To date, of the studies and search always continue on this business where many tracks were explored. None of them could satisfy the whole of the conditions which would enable us to identify with certainty the object which arose for Trans in Provence on February 08, 1981 and even less to determine the origin of it.

Many people think that there are undoubtedly very little cases of observation of UFO in the world which can justify the interest of the authorities to consider a permanent study or quite simply to set up a systematic monitoring of the sky. By consulting the files and official and deprived existing documentation, we realize opposite: there is an abundance of strange demonstrations which proceed in the sky whose were pilot in attentive observers the civil pilots and soldiers alone or in formation, like that of K Arnorld in 1947, until those describing of the evolutions much more complex with effects noted on the planes and sometimes on the ground; interferences and jamings radio operator or radars, disturbances in the instruments of navigation, even in certain cases of the physical or physiological demonstrations noted on the members of crew (heat, blindness etc.)

The analysis of some case show thus, with level world since 1942, date of first testimony aeronautical that on the some hundred of case recognize and authenticate by the authority, as that of report of book blue count by the Air Force de.l' air American between 1947 and 1968, for 20% among them, the observation visual be the fact of several observer with edge, and corroborate by radar with ground or and with edge.

With regard to France, it was brought to our attention by the civil authorities and soldiers ten aeronautical old cases of UFO, i.e. answering the identifying information not- after investigation of the authorities concerned. Since the creation of the GEPAN, and the installation of systematic procedures of the collection of testimonies, 40 air cards were transmitted by the civil aviation. Among these phenomena, only 3 or 4 of them can be regarded as pertaining to the category of the phenomena not identified after checking and simultaneous investigation of the civil authorities and military.

Finally only one case radar/visuel appraised can be truly recognized like UFO. It is this type of case which will serve to us as second example to show the obviousness and the physical reality of the phenomena UFO. **time-out** these case have all the more some value that the actor, the pilot and member of crew, bring all guarantee in their testimony so much by their competence than by their knowledge of medium aerospace they ensure of responsibility significant when they transport some passenger, or ensure the security of nation with command of fighter de chasse. This confers to them, consequently, a high degree of credibility.

Vertical of Paris, January 28, 1994, the flight Nice London 3532 of Air France carries out a way without problem at an altitude of cruising of 11200 meters. The steward present in the cabin alerts the copilot and the commander that there is funny right "balloon" in front of the apparatus! **time-out** it be 13 hour 12 minute and the " balloon " in question himself locate with 25 mile nautical (with little meadow 40 kilometer) of plane, a little above of a thick layer of viola cumulus with approximately 10000 meter of altitude. The plane carries on its road, maintains its course, and approaches the " balloon " which will not modify at any time its trajectory and will disappear on the left from the apparatus a few moments after a strange manner. The crew will note indeed that contours of the object will become gradually fuzzy and that it will disappear practically on the spot. Air control will require of the crew, as it is the rule, to make a deposition near the civil aeronautics authorities and military. This observation could appear alleviating and banal if the elements of trajectory and descriptions of the phenomenon had made it possible to establish its identification, but it will not be the case. The checks carried out near the control of civil and military air transport will not enable us to retain the presence of a weather balloon or that of civil aircraft or military, stealth prototype included/understood, but well that of a physically unknown object. It is the strangeness of the form, lenticular of dark red color, without apparent details, wing, control surface or engines and especially its dimension which seemed enormous - estimated at 1000 meters! - but which after calculation and checking of the positions and the apparent diameters will be brought back between 250 and 300 meters, which will disturb more the crew.

The interest of this case be reinforce by the fact that simultaneously with observation visual, the radar of monitoring air have record certain parameter of evolution of this object, in particular the speed which be constant and lower A 200km/h, what can return incompatible the presence of a aircraft traditional of this size and of this form. The disappearance of the object will be noted simultaneously by the crew like on the radarscopes and will remain a mystery. With the present stage of the investigations carried out near the various civil organizations and implied soldiers, it appears that there was observation well and simultaneous detection radar of a physical object not identified evolving/moving during 50 seconds above the Paris area This case is until now single in its kind in France. **time-out** it allow of show that the chain of acquisition of information and of processing of data A perfectly function for provide of element which allow of show the reality and the existence of object physics of nature still unknown factor in our sky. This case could never reproduce, but with the difference in certain numbers of former businesses of UFO listed in the world, this one recent and is recognized by the civil authorities and military of our country.

More the skeptics of our rationalists can point out that only one case does not mean large thing in comparison with the criteria of scientific analysis. However, like the cases of brought closer observation such that the Trans ones in Provence, they come to be added to very many others with the four corners of the world. Somebody said " the absence of proof does not mean the proof of the absence. " In any case, starting from these examples, one will not be able to say any more with regard to the UFO which it is not absolutely necessary of rumors, hallucinations or invention. It would be time not to more neglect the interest to study these phenomena. In the past, examples of singular events, sometimes of single facts, opened unsuspected horizons which upset our companies. The involuntary experimentation of Becquerel, which left one night to the bottom of a drawer a piece of pitchblende (uranium ore containing ') on a photographic plate, is the obvious demonstration. The continuation showed that this innocent error gave access the atomic era!

At the beginning of this article, I positioned the debate on the question of the UFO on the level of the obviousness of the phenomenon by the proof, the physical proof of course since the scientists want to intend to speak only about it. For that, the intellectual requirement passes by the objective examination of facts which can beings attested and checked only by instrumental and repetitive measurement in time. However the fact of stopping at the simple stage of the report and the investigations is insufficient, even if those are carried out with rigour and method. In the same way it appears as if the phenomenon UFO presents an aggressive or dangerous character for the populations, that can be only in the spirits, and only of sociological or spiritual nature. For my part, it appears significant to to me to continue and amplify the work undertaken in France on this subject. **time-out** that pass by the improvement of means of data acquisition, in particular of instrument de measuring optical and radar of monitoring of space and the engagement of true program of research multi-field civil and military. **time-out** indeed, if the phenomenon UFO be physical, and it seem that it be the case, that it himself reproduce in the time and that its character universal be show, it there have then require to it apprehend with effectiveness, to put in place a collection systematic of information, in it widen, initially, with scale of Europe and why not, with that of planet very whole. AT the stage of the analysis and interpretations suggested, it is undoubtedly still too early to affirm anything; however scientists who put forth assumptions and suggest interpretations on the UFO could find brief replies in the work already carried out in France.

For example the studies and search which was already committed in the field of modelings in magnetohydrodynamics, could beings continued and amplified. For that, only a scientific multi-field co-operation and especially the will to act will make it possible to create the conditions necessary to finally bore the nature of these mysterious phenomena UFO in an ultimate stage, we will perhaps reach their true nature and, why not, a day discover their origin that of aucuns place side of stars.

Copyright Jean-Jacques VELASCO.

[nikp52]

πολυ θεωρηα και μλα μλα αλα ουσια καμια.υπαρχουν η δεν υπαρχουν.δωστε στηχεια και εμεις οι σχετικα αμορφωτοι αλα δηψα για γνωση να μπορουμε να συμετασχουμε στην σηζητηση και να παρουμε λιγη γνωση

[dhatz]

Πριν λίγες μέρες, η γαλλική υπηρεσία Διαστημικής CNES (το αντιστοιχο της αμερικ. NASA) ανακοίνωσε πως θα δημοσιοποιήσει αρχείο 1600 θεάσεων UFO στη Γαλλία των 30 τελευταίων ετών μέσα στον επόμενο μήνα τέλη Ιανουαρίου / αρχές Φεβρουαρίου 2007 στο website της www.cnes.fr

Το γαλλικό δημόσιο αρχείο UFO ξεκίνησε "επίσημα" το 1977 αλλα η μελέτη ξεκίνησε απο το 1950. Το χρονικό ηταν:

GEPAN 1977-1987
SEPRA 1988-2004
GEIPAN 2005-σημερα

Η "χρυσή" περίοδος ήταν μέχρι το 1983, με προσωπικό 10 άτομα, τα περιστατικά με πολίτες έρχονταν μέσω Αστυνομίας, πιλότων κλπ και στις μελέτες συμμετείχε προσωπικο απο τις αλλες υπηρεσίες της CNES.

Το 1979, ο τότε επικεφαλής του project Poher κατέληξε στο συμπέρασμα ότι τα UFO είναι πραγματικά, παρουσίασε τα αποτελέσματα στην επιστημονική επιτροπή αλλά συνάντησε αρνηση και ο ίδιος δεν δημοσιοποίησε τη θέση του οπως π.χ. ο Velasco το 2004 (βλ. προηγούμενο μηνυμα μου).

Science News
PARIS (Reuters)

The French space agency is to publish its archive of UFO sightings
and other phenomena online, but will keep the names of those who
reported them off the site to protect them from pestering by space
fanatics. Jacques Arnould, an official at the National Space Studies
Center (CNES), said the French database of around 1,600 incidents
would go live in late January or mid-February.

He said the CNES had been collecting statements and documents for
almost 30 years to archive and study them. "Often they are made to
the Gendarmerie, which provides an official witness statement ... and
some come from airline pilots," he said by telephone. Given the
success of films about visitations from outer space
like "E.T.", "Close Encounters of The Third Kind" and "Independence
Day", the CNES archive is likely to prove a hit.

It consists of around 6,000 reports, many relating to the same
incident, filed by the public and airline professionals. Their names
would not be published to protect their privacy, Anould said.
Advances in technology over the past three decades had prompted the
decision to put the archive online, he said, adding it would likely
be available via the CNES website www.cnes.fr.
© Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.

[dhatz]

Πριν κανα μήνα, αρχές Δεκ-06, έκανε πρεμιέρα ένα νέο ντοκυμαντέρ με τίτλο "Fastwalkers: Ufo and Alien Disclosure" (Fastwalkers είναι το κωδικό όνομα για τα UFO στην intelligence community τις τελευταίες δεκαετίες). Υπάρχει online στο Googlevideo (http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-4807962636315529202) είτε απο Torrent (700MB) είτε σε DVD.

Προκειται για μια σειρά απο συνεντεύξεις 3-5 λεπτών, σχετικά με το θέμα UFO/εξωγήινοι η μια μετά την άλλη χωρίς ομως κάποια ιδιαίτερη "δομή", βλ. http://www.fastwalkers.com/featured/featured.htm

Προσωπικά δεν μου πολυάρεσε, απο την άποψη ότι μπερδεύει πρακτικά αδιαμφισβήτητες μαρτυρίες απο πρώτο χέρι οπως π.χ. του Bethume (http://www.fastwalkers.com/featured/GrahamEBethune_x.htm) ο οποίος διηγειται πως ως πιλότος του Πολ.Ναυτικου το 1951 γυρνώντας απο Ισλανδία, ειδε μαζι με πλήρωμα και επιβάτες εναν τεράστιο ιπτάμενο δισκο -100μ διάμετρο!- που τους ακολούθησε για 8 λεπτα.


Commander Graham Bethune is a retired Navy Pilot.

During his 26 years of active duty he qualified in over 100 different models of aircraft. He flew Naval Transports for 12 years, was a "VIP Transport Plane Commander," and held a "Top Secret" clearance. He was a test pilot and served 6 years with the Naval Bureau of Aeronautics. He holds a civilian “Airline Transport Pilots Rating," is a "Quiet Birdman" and accumulated over 10,000 Navy and civilian hours.

He has flown the Secretary of the Navy, Secretary of the Army, Secretary of the Brazilian Navy, Chief of Naval Operations, Commandant of the Marine Corps, the Supreme Allied Commander, and the NATO Commander Admiral Lynde McCormick who succeeded General Eisenhower when he became President.

February 5, 1951 he and two other Navy Pilots were sent to Keflavic, Iceland on a Secret mission to meet with the Icelandic Government and Lockheed Overseas, who managed the Airport.

February 10, 1951, while Piloting a four engine Navy Transport from Keflavic, Iceland, to Argentia, Newfoundland, they had an 8 minute encounter with an "Unidentified Flying Object" that was 300 feet in diameter.

The first chapter of Major Keyhoe's book "Flying Saucers Top Secret" is devoted to this famous encounter

με ορισμένες εντελώς speculative μαρτυρίες, που π.χ. περιγράφουν τη μορφη των εξωγήινων και τι τρώνε (...)

Με δυο λόγια, δεν χάνετε και πολλά αν δεν το δείτε και σιγουρα υπάρχουν πιο προσεγμένα ντοκυμαντερ (βλ. σελίδα που ετοίμασα).

[Jim Slip]

Τελικά παιδιά υπάρχουν πραγματικά τα ΟΥΦΟ; Εξωγήινοι τα έχουνε; Γιατί δεν κατεβαίνουν να πούμε καμιά κουβέντα να περάσει η ώρα;

Και μια που το' φερε η κουβέντα, θυμάστε τη δεκαετία του '80 που όταν έλεγες τον άλλο ΟΥΦΟ ήταν προσβολή; "Είσαι ΟΥΦΟ", χαχαχαχαχαχαχαχ.

[manoulamou]

UFOs = ΑΤΙΑ
Unidentified flying object= Αγνωστης Ταυτοτητας Ιπταμενα Αντικειμενα
Υπηρχαν, υπαρχουν και θα υπαρχουν, κυριολεκτικα μιλωντας, αφου οι γνωσεις ολων μας ειναι πεπερασμενες.
Αυτο δεν σημαινει πως ολα ειναι διαστημοπλοια,τα οποια οδηγουν εξωγήινοι, μπορει και κανενα.
Επιστημονικα και στατιστικα καπου σε καποια γωνιτσα του συμπαντος
ισως να υπαρχουν νοημονες οντοτητες αλλα το αν μας επισκεφτηκαν
και αν θελουν και αν μπορουμε να τους δουμε, ειναι πολυ μεγαλη συζητηση.
Ωρες ωρες θεωρω πλεον τον τιτλο ουφο εως και τιμητικο:rolleyes: :cool:

[dhatz]

Τελικά παιδιά υπάρχουν πραγματικά τα ΟΥΦΟ; Εξωγήινοι τα έχουνε;

Βρε JimSlip, γιαυτό εστειλα σχετικό υλικό (προσαρμοσμένο βεβαια στα δικά μου γούστα του τι θα'θελα να δω) στον παρόν thread, ώστε ο καθένας πλέον με συγκριτικά λιγοτερο κόπο να μπορεί να βγάλει τα ΔΙΚΑ του συμπεράσματα.

Την προσωπική μου άποψη, την έγραψα και πριν κανα-δυο μήνες (χωρίς επεξηγήσεις, απλα το συμπέρασμα).

[Jim Slip]

Φίλε dhatz επειδή το θέμα μετρά 34 σελίδες, μπορείς να μας παραπέμψεις απευθείας στο ζουμί της υπόθεσης, με λίγα λόγια ποιες σελίδες να κοιτάξουμε;

[dhatz]

Jim, μπορείς να διαβασεις απο τη σελίδα 20 και μετά, μέχρι εδω. Για πιο "δομημένα", αλλά στα Αγγλικά, δες την σελίδα που ετοίμασα στο http://www.hyper.net/ufo.html και έχει προς το τέλος και μια ενότητα με τις θέσεις των "UFO-σκεπτικιστών".

Τωρα αν σαν "ζουμί" θες και την προσωπική μου γνώμη (με τα όποια στοιχεία αλλά και biases την διαμόρφωσα), με δυο λόγια:

1/ ΝΑΙ θεωρώ πρακτικά βέβαιο οτι UFO υπάρχουν (όχι με τον γενικό ορισμό που γραφει πιο πανω η manoulamou ότι είδε κάποιος κάτι που δεν μπορούσε να ταυτοποιήσει = ΑΤΙΑ, αλλά με τον ειδικό ορισμό μιας "αντισυμβατικής" κατασκευής οπως π.χ. ενός "ιπτάμενου δίσκου") και
2/ ΝΑΙ, κατά 99.9% δεν είναι "γήινης" κατασκευής (δεν είναι δηλαδή ΟΛΕΣ οι σχετικές θεάσεις προιοντα κάποιου μυστικου project καποιου ισχυρου εθνους).

Απο την άλλη, για την ώρα, δεν υπάρχει πλήρης και αδιαμφισβήτητη επιστημονικά επαληθεύσιμη απόδειξη των παραπάνω.